Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25250056›Full record

ArticlePlant methods2014

Protocol: a fast and simple in situ PCR method for localising gene expression in plant tissue.

Asmini Athman, Sandra K Tanz, Vanessa M Conn, Charlotte Jordans, Gwenda M Mayo, Weng W Ng, Rachel A Burton, Simon J Conn, Matthew Gilliham

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant methods, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. MicroRNA-resistant alleles ofScience advances · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Asmini Athman *ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, University of Adelaide, Glen Osmond, SA, Australia.
Sandra K Tanz *ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Vanessa M ConnARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, University of Adelaide, Glen Osmond, SA, Australia.
Charlotte JordansARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, University of Adelaide, Glen Osmond, SA, Australia.
Gwenda M MayoWaite Research Institute & School of Agriculture, Food and Wine, University of Adelaide, PMB1, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia.
Weng W NgARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, University of Adelaide, Glen Osmond, SA, Australia.
Rachel A BurtonARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Cell Walls, University of Adelaide, Glen Osmond, SA, Australia.
Simon J ConnWaite Research Institute & School of Agriculture, Food and Wine, University of Adelaide, PMB1, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia.
Matthew GillihamARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, University of Adelaide, Glen Osmond, SA, Australia.
Australian Wine Research Institute · AUARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology · AUUniversity of Adelaide · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn important step in characterising the function of a gene is identifying the cells in which it is expressed. Traditional methods to determine this include in situ hybridisation, gene promoter-reporter fusions or cell isolation/purification techniques followed by quantitative PCR. These methods, although frequently used, can have limitations including their time-consuming nature, limited specificity, reliance upon well-annotated promoters, high cost, and the need for specialized equipment. In situ PCR is a relatively simple and rapid method that involves the amplification of specific mRNA directly within plant tissue whilst incorporating labelled nucleotides that are subsequently detected by immunohistochemistry. Another notable advantage of this technique is that it can be used on plants that are not easily genetically transformed.

resultsAn optimised workflow for in-tube and on-slide in situ PCR is presented that has been evaluated using multiple plant species and tissue types. The protocol includes optimised methods for: (i) fixing, embedding, and sectioning of plant tissue; (ii) DNase treatment; (iii) in situ RT-PCR with the incorporation of DIG-labelled nucleotides; (iv) signal detection using colourimetric alkaline phosphatase substrates; and (v) mounting and microscopy. We also provide advice on troubleshooting and the limitations of using fluorescence as an alternative detection method. Using our protocol, reliable results can be obtained within two days from harvesting plant material. This method requires limited specialized equipment and can be adopted by any laboratory with a vibratome (vibrating blade microtome), a standard thermocycler, and a microscope. We show that the technique can be used to localise gene expression with cell-specific resolution.

conclusionsThe in situ PCR method presented here is highly sensitive and specific. It reliably identifies the cellular expression pattern of even highly homologous and low abundance transcripts within target tissues, and can be completed within two days of harvesting tissue. As such, it has considerable advantages over other methods, especially in terms of time and cost. We recommend its adoption as the standard laboratory technique of choice for demonstrating the cellular expression pattern of a gene of interest.

Indexed as

Cell-specific localisationImmunohistochemistryIn situ PCRPlant tissueRT-PCR

Identifiers

PMID25250056
PMCPMC4171716
OpenAlexW1993072078

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.