ArticleMolecular biology reports2014
Comparative analysis of gene expression among species of different ploidy.
Article in Molecular biology reports, 2014. 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.
- Towards Improving Embryo Prioritization: Parallel Next Generation Sequencing of DNA and RNA from a Single Trophectoderm Biopsy.Scientific reports · 2019Trial
- Validation of Reference Genes in a Population of BlueberryPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Isolation and Molecular Characterisation ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Reference Genes in the Polyploid ComplexPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Validation of reference genes for quantitative gene expression in the Lippia alba polyploid complex (Verbenaceae).Molecular biology reports · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interspecific comparative studies require that expression data be comparable among species, and when species with different levels of ploidy are contemplated the relative expression per cell should be obtained for accurate comparisons to be made. Quantitative reverse-transcription-PCR is the most popular and sensitive technique for the detection and quantification of mRNA in gene expression analysis. In recent years it has become clear that the choice of reference genes for the normalization of expression data is very important. Several studies have shown that the expression of the traditional housekeeping genes varies under certain situations; their use as reference genes in quantitative PCR assays can therefore lead to errors when interpreting the relative expression of target genes. Normalizing with respect to endogenous genes showing a constant level of expression per cell across species, however, provides an easy way of obtaining comparable expression data for other genes in those species. In this work, the validity of several candidate genes was examined across four diploid and polyploid species of the genera Triticum and Aegilops. Candidate reference genes were chosen among the traditional housekeeping genes used in quantitative PCR analysis, as well as others found to have stable levels of expression under different conditions in other studies. After the analyses, candidate genes were gathered into two groups according to the different levels of expression per cell seen in polyploid species. For the four species studied, two genes suitable for normalization procedures in interspecific studies were identified: cell division control protein and malate dehydrogenase. Both showed a constant number of transcripts per cell, independent of the level of ploidy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24985981What 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.