Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34922010›Full record

ReviewMolecular & cellular proteomics : MCP2022

Subcellular Transcriptomics and Proteomics: A Comparative Methods Review.

Josie A Christopher, Aikaterini Geladaki, Charlotte S Dawson, Owen L Vennard, Kathryn S Lilley

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. EngineeringFrontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Proximitomics by Reactive Species.ACS central science · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Josie A ChristopherDepartment of Biochemistry, Cambridge Centre for Proteomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Milner Therapeutics Institute, Jeffrey Cheah Biomedical Centre, Cambridge, UK.
Aikaterini GeladakiDepartment of Biochemistry, Cambridge Centre for Proteomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Charlotte S DawsonDepartment of Biochemistry, Cambridge Centre for Proteomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Milner Therapeutics Institute, Jeffrey Cheah Biomedical Centre, Cambridge, UK.
Owen L VennardDepartment of Biochemistry, Cambridge Centre for Proteomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Milner Therapeutics Institute, Jeffrey Cheah Biomedical Centre, Cambridge, UK.
Kathryn S LilleyDepartment of Biochemistry, Cambridge Centre for Proteomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Milner Therapeutics Institute, Jeffrey Cheah Biomedical Centre, Cambridge, UK. Electronic address: ksl23@cam.ac.uk.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/R505304/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/R505365/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 110071/Z/15/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The internal environment of cells is molecularly crowded, which requires spatial organization via subcellular compartmentalization. These compartments harbor specific conditions for molecules to perform their biological functions, such as coordination of the cell cycle, cell survival, and growth. This compartmentalization is also not static, with molecules trafficking between these subcellular neighborhoods to carry out their functions. For example, some biomolecules are multifunctional, requiring an environment with differing conditions or interacting partners, and others traffic to export such molecules. Aberrant localization of proteins or RNA species has been linked to many pathological conditions, such as neurological, cancer, and pulmonary diseases. Differential expression studies in transcriptomics and proteomics are relatively common, but the majority have overlooked the importance of subcellular information. In addition, subcellular transcriptomics and proteomics data do not always colocate because of the biochemical processes that occur during and after translation, highlighting the complementary nature of these fields. In this review, we discuss and directly compare the current methods in spatial proteomics and transcriptomics, which include sequencing- and imaging-based strategies, to give the reader an overview of the current tools available. We also discuss current limitations of these strategies as well as future developments in the field of spatial -omics.

Indexed as

ProteomicsTranscriptomeProteinsRNAProteinsRNAcellular fractionationimagingproximity labelingspatial proteomicsspatial transcriptomics

Identifiers

PMID34922010
PMCPMC8864473

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.