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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Subkhankulova, Tatiana, Livesey, Frederick J
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