Cargando…
Comparative evaluation of linear and exponential amplification techniques for expression profiling at the single-cell level
BACKGROUND: Single-cell microarray expression profiling requires 10(8)-10(9)-fold amplification of the picogram amounts of total RNA typically found in eukaryotic cells. Several methods for RNA amplification are in general use, but little consideration has been given to the comparative analysis of t...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2006
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1557751/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16542485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/gb-2006-7-3-r18 |
_version_ | 1782129404182265856 |
---|---|
author | Subkhankulova, Tatiana Livesey, Frederick J |
author_facet | Subkhankulova, Tatiana Livesey, Frederick J |
author_sort | Subkhankulova, Tatiana |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Single-cell microarray expression profiling requires 10(8)-10(9)-fold amplification of the picogram amounts of total RNA typically found in eukaryotic cells. Several methods for RNA amplification are in general use, but little consideration has been given to the comparative analysis of those methods in terms of the overall validity of the data generated when amplifying from single-cell amounts of RNA, rather than their empirical performance in single studies. RESULTS: We tested the performance of three methods for amplifying single-cell amounts of RNA under ideal conditions: T7-based in vitro transcription; switching mechanism at 5' end of RNA template (SMART) PCR amplification; and global PCR amplification. All methods introduced amplification-dependent noise when mRNA was amplified 10(8)-fold, compared with data from unamplified cDNA. PCR-amplified cDNA demonstrated the smallest number of differences between two parallel replicate samples and the best correlation between independent amplifications from the same cell type, with SMART outperforming global PCR amplification. SMART had the highest true-positive rate and the lowest false-positive rate when comparing expression between two different cell types, but had the lowest absolute discovery rate of all three methods. Direct comparison of the performance of SMART and global PCR amplification on single-cell amounts of total RNA and on single neural stem cells confirmed these findings. CONCLUSION: Under the conditions tested, PCR amplification was more reliable than linear amplification for detecting true expression differences between samples. SMART amplification had a higher true-positive rate than global amplification, but at the expense of a considerably lower absolute discovery rate and a systematic compression of observed expression ratios. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-1557751 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2006 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-15577512006-09-01 Comparative evaluation of linear and exponential amplification techniques for expression profiling at the single-cell level Subkhankulova, Tatiana Livesey, Frederick J Genome Biol Research BACKGROUND: Single-cell microarray expression profiling requires 10(8)-10(9)-fold amplification of the picogram amounts of total RNA typically found in eukaryotic cells. Several methods for RNA amplification are in general use, but little consideration has been given to the comparative analysis of those methods in terms of the overall validity of the data generated when amplifying from single-cell amounts of RNA, rather than their empirical performance in single studies. RESULTS: We tested the performance of three methods for amplifying single-cell amounts of RNA under ideal conditions: T7-based in vitro transcription; switching mechanism at 5' end of RNA template (SMART) PCR amplification; and global PCR amplification. All methods introduced amplification-dependent noise when mRNA was amplified 10(8)-fold, compared with data from unamplified cDNA. PCR-amplified cDNA demonstrated the smallest number of differences between two parallel replicate samples and the best correlation between independent amplifications from the same cell type, with SMART outperforming global PCR amplification. SMART had the highest true-positive rate and the lowest false-positive rate when comparing expression between two different cell types, but had the lowest absolute discovery rate of all three methods. Direct comparison of the performance of SMART and global PCR amplification on single-cell amounts of total RNA and on single neural stem cells confirmed these findings. CONCLUSION: Under the conditions tested, PCR amplification was more reliable than linear amplification for detecting true expression differences between samples. SMART amplification had a higher true-positive rate than global amplification, but at the expense of a considerably lower absolute discovery rate and a systematic compression of observed expression ratios. BioMed Central 2006 2006-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC1557751/ /pubmed/16542485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/gb-2006-7-3-r18 Text en Copyright © 2006 Subkhankulova and Livesey; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Subkhankulova, Tatiana Livesey, Frederick J Comparative evaluation of linear and exponential amplification techniques for expression profiling at the single-cell level |
title | Comparative evaluation of linear and exponential amplification techniques for expression profiling at the single-cell level |
title_full | Comparative evaluation of linear and exponential amplification techniques for expression profiling at the single-cell level |
title_fullStr | Comparative evaluation of linear and exponential amplification techniques for expression profiling at the single-cell level |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative evaluation of linear and exponential amplification techniques for expression profiling at the single-cell level |
title_short | Comparative evaluation of linear and exponential amplification techniques for expression profiling at the single-cell level |
title_sort | comparative evaluation of linear and exponential amplification techniques for expression profiling at the single-cell level |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1557751/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16542485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/gb-2006-7-3-r18 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT subkhankulovatatiana comparativeevaluationoflinearandexponentialamplificationtechniquesforexpressionprofilingatthesinglecelllevel AT liveseyfrederickj comparativeevaluationoflinearandexponentialamplificationtechniquesforexpressionprofilingatthesinglecelllevel |