Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T10:42:02.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Experimental methods for protein interaction identification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Guido Caldarelli
Affiliation:
Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), Rome
Paolo De Los Rios
Affiliation:
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Francesco Rao
Affiliation:
University of Freiburg
Michele Vendruscolo
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Protein interactions can be identified by a multitude of experimental methods. In fact, the IntAct database of molecular interactions currently lists about 170 different experimental methods and variations thereof that can be used to detect and characterize protein–protein interactions (the main classes are listed in Table 4.1). While we present the commonly used methods in this chapter we will focus on the few technologies which are used in high-throughput studies and thus generated the vast majority of interaction data available today: the yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) assay and protein complex purification and identification by mass spectrometry (MS) (Table 4.2). These two methods represent two fundamentally different sources of interaction data and thus it is important to understand how they work and what strengths and weaknesses each of them has. This is especially important for theoretical analyses which often draw conclusions from datasets which may not be adequate for certain studies. For example, membrane proteins are underrepresented in both yeast two-hybrid and complex purification studies.

Complex versus binary interactions

It is important to note that most methods detect either direct binary interactions or indirect interactions without knowing which proteins are interacting. The yeast two-hybrid system usually detects direct binary interactions while complex purification detects the components of complexes (Fig. 4.1). Complex data are often interpreted as if the proteins that co-purify are interacting in a particular manner, consistent with either a spoke or matrix model.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×