1. Principle and Methodology
1.1 Basic Principle
SILAC works on a simple yet elegant principle: cells are cultured in media containing either “light” (natural) or “heavy” (stable isotope-labeled) amino acids. As cells grow and synthesize proteins, they incorporate these amino acids into their proteome. After complete incorporation, differentially labeled cell populations can be subjected to various experimental conditions, mixed at a 1:1 ratio, and analyzed simultaneously by mass spectrometry (MS).
1.2 Key Amino Acids Used
The most commonly used amino acids in SILAC are:
• Lysine (K): typically labeled with 13C6 (Lys6), 13C615N2 (Lys8)
• Arginine (R): typically labeled with 13C6 (Arg6), 13C615N4 (Arg10)
These amino acids are chosen because trypsin, the protease commonly used in MS sample preparation, cleaves proteins at the C-terminal side of lysine and arginine residues, ensuring that each tryptic peptide (except the C-terminal peptide) contains at least one labeled amino acid.
1.3 Experimental Workflow
• Cell Culture: Cells are grown in media containing either light or heavy amino acids for at least 5-6 cell doublings to ensure complete incorporation (>95%).
• Experimental Treatment: Different treatments are applied to cells grown in different SILAC media.
• Cell Lysis and Protein Extraction: Proteins are extracted from each condition.
• Sample Mixing: Equal amounts of protein from different conditions are mixed.
• Enzymatic Digestion: The mixed proteins are digested, typically with trypsin.
• Fractionation (Optional): Peptides may be fractionated to reduce sample complexity.
• LC-MS/MS Analysis: Peptides are separated by liquid chromatography and analyzed by tandem mass spectrometry.
• Data Analysis: Mass spectra are analyzed to identify peptides and determine relative abundances based on the intensity ratios of light and heavy peptide pairs.
2. Variants and Extensions of SILAC
2.1 Triple SILAC
Triple SILAC uses three different isotopic forms (light, medium, heavy) of lysine and arginine, allowing for the comparison of three conditions in a single experiment. For example:
• Light (K0, R0): natural isotopes
• Medium (K4, R6): 2H4-Lys and 13C6-Arg
• Heavy (K8, R10): 13C615N2-Lys and 13C615N4-Arg
2.2 Super-SILAC
This approach combines multiple SILAC-labeled cell lines to create an internal standard that better represents the complexity of tissue samples. The Super-SILAC mix is then spiked into tissue samples, enabling more accurate quantification of tissue proteomes.
2.3 pSILAC (pulsed SILAC)
Instead of complete labeling, pSILAC involves a short pulse of labeling that allows for the selective analysis of newly synthesized proteins, providing insights into protein synthesis rates and turnover.
2.4 SILAC for Animal Models
Several approaches have been developed to apply SILAC to model organisms:
• SILAC Mouse: Mice fed with a diet containing heavy amino acids
• SILAC Fly: Drosophila raised on SILAC-labeled yeast
• SILAC Zebrafish: Zebrafish fed with SILAC-labeled feed
2.5 Neutron-Encoded (NeuCode) SILAC
This advanced variant uses isotopes with subtle mass differences that can only be resolved with
high-resolution mass spectrometry, allowing for multiplexing beyond triple SILAC.
3. Applications of SILAC
3.1 Quantitative Proteomics
SILAC is a gold standard for comparing protein expression levels between different cell states, such as:
• Control vs. treated cells.
• Different cell types.
• Cells at different stages of development.
3.2 Protein-Protein Interactions
SILAC is extensively used to identify and quantify protein-protein interactions. In a typical experiment, bait proteins are immunoprecipitated from heavy and light labeled cells (with one serving as a control), and interaction partners are identified based on their SILAC ratios.
3.3 Post-Translational
Modifications (PTMs)
SILAC can quantify changes in PTMs such as phosphorylation, ubiquitination, and acetylation. This is achieved by enriching for modified peptides and comparing their SILAC ratios.
3.4 Protein Turnover and Dynamics
By using pulse-chase experiments with SILAC labeling, researchers can measure protein synthesis and degradation rates, providing insights into protein dynamics.
3.5 Secretome Analysis
SILAC can be used to study proteins secreted by cells (secretome) by analyzing the culture medium of labeled cells.
3.6 Drug Target Identification
SILAC-based chemical proteomics approaches can identify protein targets of drugs and determine binding affinities.
3.7 Cell Signaling Studies
SILAC has been instrumental in mapping signaling pathways by quantifying temporal changes in protein abundance and modifications following stimulation.
4. Advantages of SILAC
• High Accuracy: SILAC provides highly accurate quantification because samples are mixed early in the workflow, minimizing technical variations.
• Multiplexing Capability: With triple SILAC and NeuCode SILAC, multiple conditions can be compared simultaneously.
• Compatible with Various Enrichment Strategies: SILAC works well with enrichment of post-translationally modified peptides, subcellular fractionation, and affinity purification.
• Complete Labeling: Unlike chemical labeling approaches, SILAC can achieve nearly complete labeling of the proteome.
• Simple Sample Preparation: The procedure is straightforward with minimal additional steps compared to standard proteomic workflows.
5. Limitations of SILAC
• Cell Culture Requirement: Traditional SILAC is limited to cells that can be cultured in vitro and undergo sufficient divisions to incorporate labeled amino acids.
• Cost: Isotope-labeled amino acids are expensive, especially for large-scale experiments.
• Limited Multiplexing: Standard SILAC is typically limited to 2-3 conditions per experiment.
• Arginine-to-Proline Conversion: Some cell lines convert labeled arginine to proline, which can complicate quantification.
• Not Directly Applicable to Clinical Samples: Primary tissues cannot be directly labeled, requiring approaches like Super-SILAC.
6. Comparison with Other Quantitative Proteomics Techniques
6.1 SILAC vs. Chemical Labeling (TMT, iTRAQ)
• Labeling Stage: SILAC occurs at the cellular level (metabolic), while TMT/iTRAQ label peptides after digestion.
• Multiplexing: TMT/iTRAQ offer higher multiplexing (up to 18-plex), compared to traditional SILAC (2-3 plex).
• Accuracy: SILAC typically provides better quantification accuracy due to earlier sample mixing.
• Applicability: TMT/iTRAQ can be applied to any sample type, while SILAC requires cell culture.
6.2 SILAC vs. Label-Free Quantification (LFQ)
• Sample Processing: SILAC requires metabolic labeling; LFQ requires no special sample preparation.
• Accuracy: SILAC generally offers better precision than LFQ.
• Throughput: LFQ can compare unlimited samples; SILAC is limited by multiplexing capabilities.
• Cost: LFQ is less expensive than SILAC.
6.3 SILAC vs. SRM/PRM/DIA
• Scope: SILAC is typically discovery-based, while SRM/PRM are targeted approaches.
• Sensitivity: SRM/PRM offer better sensitivity for low-abundance proteins.
• Quantification: Both provide good quantification, but for different purposes.
7. Recent Developments and Future Perspectives
7.1 Integration with Advanced MS Technologies
The combination of SILAC with data-independent acquisition (DIA) methods and ion mobility mass spectrometry is expanding the depth and accuracy of quantitative proteomics.
7.2 Single-Cell Applications
Efforts are underway to adapt SILAC for single-cell proteomics, although significant challenges remain.
7.3 Spatial Proteomics
SILAC is being integrated with imaging mass spectrometry and other spatial techniques to provide spatial information about protein dynamics.
SILAC has revolutionized quantitative proteomics by enabling accurate, reproducible, and relatively straightforward protein quantification. While newer techniques continue to emerge, SILAC remains a gold standard approach, particularly for studying cellular proteome dynamics, protein-protein interactions, and post-translational modifications. As mass spectrometry technology advances and new SILAC variants are developed, this technique will continue to be a valuable tool in proteomics research, contributing significantly to our understanding of cellular processes in health and disease.
References
1. Ong, S. E., Blagoev, B., Kratchmarova, I., Kristensen, D. B., Steen, H., Pandey, A., and Mann, M. (2002) Stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture, SILAC, as a simple and accurate approach to expression proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics, 1, 376–386.
2. Ong, S. E., Kratchmarova, I., and Mann, M. (2003) Properties of 13C-substituted arginine in stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture (SILAC). J Proteome Res., 2, 173–181.
3. Van Hoof, D., Pinkse, M. W., Oostwaard, D. W., Mummery, C. L., Heck, A. J., and Krijgsveld, J. (2007) An experimental correction for arginine-to-proline conversion artifacts in SILAC-based quantitative proteomics. Nat Methods, 4, 677–678.
4. Mann, M. (2006) Functional and quantitative proteomics using SILAC. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 7, 952–958.
5. Everley, P. A., Krijgsveld, J., Zetter, B. R., and Gygi, S. P. (2004) Quantitative cancer proteomics: stable isotope labeling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) as a tool for prostate cancer research. Mol Cell Proteomics, 3, 729–735.
6. Schulze, W. X., Deng, L., and Mann, M. (2005) Phosphotyrosine interactome of the ErbB- receptor kinase family. Mol Syst Biol, 1, 2005 0008.
7. Blagoev, B., Kratchmarova, I., Ong, S. E., Nielsen, M., Foster, L. J., and Mann, M. (2003) A proteomics strategy to elucidate functional protein-protein interactions applied to EGF signaling. Nat Biotechnol, 21, 315–318.
8. Schulze, W. X., and Mann, M. (2004) A novel proteomic screen for peptideprotein interactions. J Biol Chem, 279, 10756-10764.
9. Wang, X., and Huang, L. (2007) Identifying dynamic interactors of protein complexes by quantitative mass spectrometry. Mol Cell Proteomics.
10. Olsen, J. V., Blagoev, B., Gnad, F., Macek, B., Kumar, C., Mortensen, P., and Mann, M. (2006) Global, in vivo, and site-specific phosphorylation dynamics in signaling networks. Cell, 127, 635–648.
11. Ong, S. E., Mittler, G., and Mann, M. (2004) Identifying and quantifying in vivo methylation sites by heavy methyl SILAC. Nat Methods, 1, 119–126.
12. Bonenfant, D., Towbin, H., Coulot, M., Schindler, P., Mueller, D. R., and van Oostrum, J. (2007) Analysis of dynamic changes in post-translational modifications of human histones during cell cycle by mass spectrometry. Mol Cell Proteomics.
13. Vermeulen, M., Mulder, K. W., Denissov, S., Pijnappel, W. W., van Schaik, F. M., Varier, R. A., Baltissen, M. P., Stunnenberg, H. G., Mann, M., and Timmers, H. T. (2007) Selective Anchoring of TFIID to Nucleosomes by Trimethylation of Histone H3 Lysine 4. Cell, 131, 58–69.
14. Krijgsveld, J., Ketting, R. F., Mahmoudi, T., Johansen, J., Artal-Sanz, M., Verrijzer, C. P., Plasterk, R. H., and Heck, A. J. (2003) Metabolic labeling of C. elegans and D. melanogaster for quantitative proteomics. Nat Biotechnol, 21, 927–931.
