ArticleAnalytical chemistry2012
High-resolution epifluorescence and time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry chemical imaging comparisons of single DNA microarray spots.
Article in Analytical chemistry, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Three Dimensional Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry Imaging (3D-SIMS) ofJournal of analytical atomic spectrometry · 2019Article
- Optimization of Cyanine Dye Stability and Analysis of FRET Interaction on DNA Microarrays.Biology · 2016Article
- The Impact of Photobleaching on Microarray Analysis.Biology · 2015Article
- BIOPHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF NUCLEIC ACIDS AT SURFACES RELEVANT TO MICROARRAY PERFORMANCE.Biomaterials science · 2014Article
- Real-time fluorescent image analysis of DNA spot hybridization kinetics to assess microarray spot heterogeneity.Analytical chemistry · 2012Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
DNA microarray assay performance is commonly compromised by spot-spot probe and signal variations as well as heterogeneity within printed microspots. Accurate metrics for captured DNA target signal rely upon uniform spot distribution of both probe and target DNA to yield reliable hybridized signal. While often presumed, this is neither easily achieved nor often proven experimentally. High-resolution imaging techniques were used to determine spot heterogeneity in identical DNA array microspots comprising varied ratios of unlabeled and dye-labeled DNA probes contact-printed onto commercial arraying surfaces. Epifluorescence imaging data for individual array microspots were correlated with time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry (TOF-SIMS) chemical state imaging of the same spots. Epifluorescence imaging intensity distinguished varying DNA density distributed both within a given spot and from spot to spot. TOF-SIMS chemical analysis confirmed these heterogeneous printed DNA distributions by tracking bound Cy3 dye, DNA base, and phosphate specific ion fragments often correlating to fluorescence patterns within identical spots. TOF-SIMS ion fragments originating from probe DNA and Cy3 dye are enriched in microspot centers, correlating with high fluorescence intensity regions. Both TOF-SIMS and epifluorescence support Marangoni flow effects on spot drying, with high-density DNA-Cy3 located in spot centers and nonhomogeneous DNA distribution within printed spots. Microspot image dimensional analysis results for DNA droplet spreading show differing DNA densities across printed spots. The study directly supports different DNA probe chemical and spatial microenvironments within spots that yield spot-spot signal variations known to affect DNA target hybridization efficiencies and kinetics. These variations critically affect probe-target duplex formation and DNA array signal generation.
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.