title: The consequences of sample pooling in proteomics: an empirical study.
abstract: Pooling of samples in proteomics experiments might help overcome resource constraints when many individuals are analysed. The measured biological variation should be reduced giving increased power to detect treatment differences. Pooling has been advocated in microarray work but there are few tests of its potential in proteomics. In this study, we examine three issues on which the success of the pooling approach might hinge and provide evidence that: (i) the protein expression in a pool matches the mean expression of the individuals making up the pool for the majority of proteins, although for some proteins the pool expression is different; (ii) the biological variance between pools is reduced compared with that between individuals, as predicted in theory, but this reduction is not as large as expected. A practical consequence of this is that power could be reduced; (iii) proteins detectable in individual samples are usually but not always visible when samples are pooled. We conclude that pooling of samples in proteomics work is a valid and potentially valuable procedure but consideration should be given to these issues in experimental design.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Life Sciences, School of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
authors.forename: Angel P
authors.initials: AP
authors.lastname: Diz
authors.affiliation: Institute of Life Sciences, School of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
authors.forename: Manuela
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Truebano
authors.affiliation: Institute of Life Sciences, School of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
authors.forename: David O F
authors.initials: DOF
authors.lastname: Skibinski
mesh_terms: D000704:Analysis of Variance; D000818:Animals; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D015180:Electrophoresis, Gel, Two-Dimensional; D049880:Mytilus edulis / Q000737:chemistry; D040081:Protein Array Analysis / Q000379:methods*; D011506:Proteins / Q000032:analysis; D040901:Proteomics / Q000379:methods*; D012107:Research Design; D018401:Sample Size
chemical_list: D011506:Proteins
references.citation: Karp, N. A., Spencer, M., Lindsay, H., O'Dell, K., Lilley, K. S., J. Proteome Res. 2005, 4, 1867-1871.
references.citation: Karp, N. A., Lilley, K. S., Proteomics 2007, 7, 42-50.
references.citation: Horgan, G. W., J. Proteome Res. 2007, 6, 2884-2887.
references.citation: Kendziorski, C., Irizarry, R. A., Chen, K. S., Hagg, J. D., Gould, M. N., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2005, 102, 4252-4257.
references.citation: Zhang, W., Carriquiry, A., Nettleton, D., Dekkers, J. C. M., Bioinformatics 2007, 23, 1217-1224.
references.citation: Voss, T., Haberl, P., Electrophoresis 2000, 21, 3345-3350.
references.citation: Shih, J. H., Michalowska, A. M., Dobbin, K., Ye, Y., Qiu, T. H., Green, J. E., Bioinformatics 2004, 20, 3318-3325.
references.citation: Martínez-Fernández, M., Rodríguez-Piñeiro, A. M., Oliveira, E., Páez de la Cadena, M., Rolán-Álvarez, E., J. Proteome Res. 2008, 7, 4926-4934.
references.citation: Affymetrix. Affimetrix 2004, Technical note, San Diego USA.
references.citation: Lusa, L., Cappelleti, V., Gariboldi, M., Ferrario, C., De Cecco, L., Reid, J. F., Toffanin, S. et al., Int. J. Biol. Markers 2006, 21, 67-73.
references.citation: Han, E. S., Wu, Y., McCarter, R., Nelson, J. F., Richardson, A., Hilsenbeck, S. G., J. Gerentol. 2004, 59A, 306-315.
references.citation: Peng, X., Wood, C. L., Blalock, E. M., Chu Chen, K., Landfield, P. W., Stromberg, A. J., BMC Bioinformatics 2003, 4, 26.
references.citation: Karp, N. A., Lilley, K. S., Proteomics 2009, 9, 388-397.
references.citation: Krogh, M., Fernandez, C., Teilum, M., Bengtsson, S., James, P., J. Proteome Res. 2007, 6, 3335-3343.
references.citation: Grove, H., Hollung, K., Uhlen, A. K., Martens, H., Mosleth, E. F., J. Proteome Res. 2006, 5, 3399-3410.
references.citation: Weinkauf, M., Hiddemann, W., Dreyling, M., Electrophoresis 2006, 27, 4555-4558.
references.citation: Neubauer, H., Clare, S. E., Kurek, R., Fehm, T., Wallwiener, D., Sotlar, K., Nordheim, A. et al., Electrophoresis 2006, 27, 1840-1852.
references.citation: Zolg, W., Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2006, 5, 1720-1726.
references.citation: Heukeshoven, J., Dernick, R., Electrophoresis 1985, 6, 103-112.
references.citation: Grubbs, F., Technometrics 1969, 11, 1-21.
references.citation: Sokal, R. R., Rohlf, F. J., Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research, 3rd Edn, W.H. Freeman, New York 1995.
references.citation: Benjamini, Y., Hochberg, Y., J. R. Statist. Soc. B 1995, 57, 289-300.
references.citation: Verhoeven, K. J. F., Simonsen, K. L., McIntyre, L. M., Oikos 2005, 108, 643-647.
references.citation: Hood, G. M., PopTools - Software for the analysis of ecological models. Version 3.0.6, CSIRO, 2000.
references.citation: Manly, B. F. J., Randomization, Bootstrap and Monte Carlo Methods in Biology, Chapman and Hall, London, 2001.
references.citation: Diz, A. P., Skibinski, D. O. F., Proteomics 2007, 7, 2111-2120.
references.citation: Diz, A. P., Dudley, E., MacDonald, B. W., Piña, B., Kenchington, E. L. R., Zouros, E., Skibinski, D. O. F., Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2009, 8, 132-144.