Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32832268›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2020

There is no magic bullet: the importance of testing reference gene stability in RT-qPCR experiments across multiple closely related species.

Bert Foquet, Hojun Song

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Biomedicines · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bert FoquetDepartment of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States of America.
Hojun SongDepartment of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States of America.
Texas A&M University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reverse Transcriptase quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-qPCR) is the current gold standard tool for the study of gene expression. This technique is highly dependent on the validation of reference genes, which exhibit stable expression levels among experimental conditions. Often, reference genes are assumed to be stable a priori without a rigorous test of gene stability. However, such an oversight can easily lead to misinterpreting expression levels of target genes if the references genes are in fact not stable across experimental conditions. Even though most gene expression studies focus on just one species, comparative studies of gene expression among closely related species can be very informative from an evolutionary perspective. In our study, we have attempted to find stable reference genes for four closely related species of grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae) that together exhibit a spectrum of density-dependent phenotypic plasticity. Gene stability was assessed for eight reference genes in two tissues, two experimental conditions and all four species. We observed clear differences in the stability ranking of these reference genes, both between tissues and between species. Additionally, the choice of reference genes clearly influenced the results of a gene expression experiment. We offer suggestions for the use of reference genes in further studies using these four species, which should be taken as a cautionary tale for future studies involving RT-qPCR in a comparative framework.

Indexed as

Gene expressionLocustOrthopteraPhenotypic plasticityReal-time quantitative PCRReference gene

Identifiers

PMID32832268
PMCPMC7409783
OpenAlexW3046462089

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.