“[W]e found that the S-Traps demonstrated the best overall performance, with the largest numbers of protein identifications and quantitative reproducibility. The S-Trap protocol requires little more time than a typical in-solution digestion and provides the flexibility to use SDS in your proteomics sample. In addition, it outperformed all other methods regardless of lysis conditions. Therefore, S-Traps provide the best balance of time, cost, and performance of the bottom-up workflows examined in this study.

S-Traps “…can generate digestion-ready samples within minutes. As comparing to currently available approach such as FASP, the S-Trap truly shortens the bench time from over three hours to 10~20 minutes, thus speeding up the entire assembly line of proteomics analysis.”

“The S-Trap has changed sample processing in our lab dramatically. Using SDS for sample preparation is no longer hampered by the need to precipitate and resolubilize sample pellets prior to digestion. The fast digestion times enhance our phosphopeptide recovery and enable a wide range of sample quantities (from 10 ug to 10 mg) to be processed efficiently.”

John NeveuHarvard University, Cambridge, MA

“I am very excited about ProtiFi S-Traps. We compared our standard preparation to S-Traps on clinical samples. The number of peptides identified increased 51% – 125% and proteins increased 29% – 54%. Simultaneously, the coefficient of variation (CV), decreased from 12% – 16% with standard methods to 5% – 9% with S-Traps. We can now perform deeper dives into the proteome while acquiring more reproducible data.”

Prof. Dr. Rob MortizDirector of Proteomics, Institute of Systems Biology, Seattle, WA

“Our lab was a FASP-based clinical proteomics lab. We prepared all the proteomics samples using FASP-filters; all our publications are FASP-orientated; all our grants are FASP-related. Now, we have switched to ProtiFi’s S-Trap platform! As you can see from our preliminary data, S-Trap produce similar number of miscleavage sites, similar number of proteins/peptide IDs and basically have similar performance to FASP. But S-Trap is >20 times faster than FASP not counting the digestion step!” [Emphasis and colors in original.]

Prof. Dr. Yanbao YuJ. Craig Venter Institute, Rockville, MD

“We switched from urea based lysis to SDS + S-Trap for phosphopeptide enrichment. The yield with the S-Trap is so high that we needed to reduce the starting material from 1 mg to 300 ug lysate and get the same coverage as before. It really is a transformative method.”

Prof. Dr. Yishai LevinHead of the de Botton Institute for Protein Profiling, Weizmann Institute of Science.

We were very surprised with S-Traps studying bile. We identified 225 proteins analyzing 20 ug of protein with standard techniques. We then analyzed 1 ug using your “ultra-high recovery” micro protocol. We identified 662 proteins: 3X more! The reproducibility of peptide retention times is also significantly improved. [Emphasis in original.]

Sergio Ciordia HigueraNational Center for Biotechnology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

“The S-Trap is honestly AMAZING!  We just finished processing approximately 200,000 cells for a complex analysis and compared it to FASP on our QE Plus. We found a significant increase in overall quantifiable peptides. The results gave us higher confidence in our analysis and we plan on purchasing at least 3 more boxes right away! S-Traps are simply fantastic!”

Stevens LabAlbany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences

“ProtiFi’s S-Trap is a revolutionary tool to increase reproducibility and quality of traditional membrane proteomic analysis.  As a lipid biologist, the analysis of enzymes localized to membrane bound organelles frequently frustrated our attempts to identify regulatory components of bioactive lipids.  The ability of S-Traps to handle 5% SDS has dramatically increased our recovery of membrane bound proteins.  There is no need to solubilize the proteins once they have been loaded onto the S-Trap, therefore reproducibility is increased as we no longer fight to keep these hydrophobic proteins in solution.  The S-Trap is a great addition to our toolbox that has an easy and quick protocol.”

Dr. Justin SniderStony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY

“We have tested various proteomics sample preparation protocols before we came to S-Traps. Protein digestion by using S-Traps is easy and fast. In terms of both qualitative and quantitative measurement, S-Traps provide much more reproducible throughput and results as compared to traditional in-solution digestion protocol and FASP.”

Sim Kae Hwan A*STAR Bioprocessing Technology Institute (BTI)

“The S-Trap is by far the best way to digest samples. The benefits include reliable SDS solubilization, significantly reduced sample handling (no need to MeOH:chloroform precipitate and struggle solubilizing the pellet again) as well as fast digestion times and instrument friendly output with little further clean-up needed.”

Proteomics Core Manager

“ProtiFi’s S-Trap columns work great. They outperformed urea and FASP protocols. The yield is higher, digestion takes one hour (!!) and the whole protocol is much simpler than FASP.”

Core Lab Head

“I work in a Core Facility for Proteomics at a federal institute. Most applications are standard workflows like Global Expression Analysis, Interaction analysis or PTMs. Samples are often prepared by our collaborators, which are not Mass Spec experts and we recommended FASP or in Solution Digestion (Urea) for a long time. However sample quality was always an issue (low yield and SDS in FASP and PEG in in-Solution). So I tested almost all Sample Prep Methods I know of, like inStageTip or SP3, etc. Your S-Traps perform very well and are highly reproducible. I perform Digestion in S-Traps overnight in 50 mM TEAB (pH = 8.0 @ 37 °C) and load samples without desalting, which is also very nice to skip this step. We now give the S-Traps to all our collaborators.”

ResearcherProteomics Core Facility

“Our lab tested S-Trap for standard protein extraction protocol. They performed beautifully we now employ them for FFPE samples.”

PathologistUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA