ArticleBMC genomics2005
A qualitative assessment of direct-labeled cDNA products prior to microarray analysis.
Article in BMC genomics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A near-complete assembly of the Houttuynia cordata genome provides insights into the regulatory mechanism of flavonoid biosynthesis in Yuxingcao.Plant communications · 2024Article
- Evaluation of RNA purification methods by using different blood stabilization tubes: identification of key features for epidemiological studies.BMC research notes · 2020Article
- Brain tumor cell line authentication, an efficient alternative to capillary electrophoresis by using a microfluidics-based system.Neuro-oncology · 2014Article
- Evaluation of a novel approach for the measurement of RNA quality.BMC research notes · 2010Article
- BABAR: an R package to simplify the normalisation of common reference design microarray-based transcriptomic datasets.BMC bioinformatics · 2010Article
- Evaluation of Candidate Reference Genes for Real-Time Quantitative PCR of Plant Samples Using Purified cDNA as Template.Plant molecular biology reporter · 2009Article
- Methodological considerations for gene expression profiling of human brain.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe success of the microarray process in determining differential gene expression of thousands of genes is dependent upon the quality and integrity of the starting RNA, this being particularly true of direct labeling via a reverse transcription procedure. Furthermore, an RNA of reasonable quality still may not yield reliable hybridization data if the labeling efficiency was poor.
resultsHere we present a novel assay for assessing the quality of directly labeled fluorescent cDNA prior to microarray hybridization utilizing the Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer, which employs microfluidic technology for the analysis of nucleic acids and proteins. Using varying amounts of RNase to simulate RNA degradation, we show the strength of this un-advertised assay in determining the relative amounts of cDNA obtained from a direct labeling reaction.
conclusionUtilization of this method in the lab will help to prevent the costly mistake of hybridizing poor quality direct labeled products to expensive arrays.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.