SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Neuronal Differentiation of LUHMES Cells Induces Substantial Changes of the Proteome.

Proteomics · 2020-10-08

DOI: 10.1002/pmic.202000174PMID: 32951307

Check source for accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Neuronal cell lines are important model systems to study mechanisms of neurodegenerative diseases. One example is the Lund Human Mesencephalic (LUHMES) cell line, which can differentiate into dopaminergic-like neurons and is frequently used to study mechanisms of Parkinson's disease and neurotoxicity. Neuronal differentiation of LUHMES cells is commonly verified with selected neuronal markers, but little is known about the proteome-wide protein abundance changes during differentiation. Using mass spectrometry and label-free quantification (LFQ), the proteome of differentiated and undifferentiated LUHMES cells and of primary murine midbrain neurons are compared. Neuronal differentiation induced substantial changes of the LUHMES cell proteome, with proliferation-related proteins being strongly down-regulated and neuronal and dopaminergic proteins, such as L1CAM and α-synuclein (SNCA) being up to 1,000-fold up-regulated. Several of these proteins, including MAPT and SYN1, may be useful as new markers for experimentally validating neuronal differentiation of LUHMES cells. Primary midbrain neurons are slightly more closely related to differentiated than to undifferentiated LUHMES cells, in particular with respect to the abundance of proteins related to neurodegeneration. In summary, the analysis demonstrates that differentiated LUHMES cells are a suitable model for studies on neurodegeneration and provides a resource of the proteome-wide changes during neuronal differentiation. (ProteomeXchange identifier PXD020044).

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.