ArticlePloS one2009
Technical analysis of cDNA microarrays.
Article in PloS one, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacogenomics: A Genetic Approach to Drug Development and Therapy.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Recent Major Transcriptomics and Epitranscriptomics Contributions toward Personalized and Precision Medicine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Gene expression variability and the analysis of large-scale RNA-seq studies with the MDSeq.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
- The effect of short-term hypoxic exposure on metabolic gene expression.Journal of experimental zoology. Part A, Ecological genetics and physiology · 2012Article
- Do-it-yourself: construction of a custom cDNA macroarray platform with high sensitivity and linear range.BMC biotechnology · 2011Article
- Article
- Embryonic gene expression among pollutant resistant and sensitive Fundulus heteroclitus populations.Aquatic toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2010Article
- The effect of genetic and environmental variation on metabolic gene expression.Molecular ecology · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is extensive variation in gene expression among individuals within and between populations. Accurate measures of the variation in mRNA expression using microarrays can be confounded by technical variation, which includes variation in RNA isolation procedures, day of hybridization and methods used to amplify and dye label RNA for hybridization. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsIn this manuscript we analyze the relationship between the amount of mRNA and the fluorescent signal from the microarray hybridizations demonstrating that for a wide-range of mRNA concentrations the fluorescent signal is a linear function of the amount of mRNA. Additionally, the separate isolation, labeling or hybridization of RNA does not add significant amounts of variation in microarray measures of gene expression. However, single or double rounds of amplification for labeling do have small but significant affects on 10% of genes, but this source of technical variation is easy to avoid. To examine both technical and stochastic biological variation, mRNA expression was measured from the same five individuals over a six-week time course.
conclusionThere were few, if any, meaningful differences in gene expression among time points. Thus, microarray measures using standard laboratory procedures can be precise and quantitative and are not subject to significant random biological noise.
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.