Cargando…
Scanner calibration revisited
BACKGROUND: Calibration of a microarray scanner is critical for accurate interpretation of microarray results. Shi et al. (BMC Bioinformatics, 2005, 6, Art. No. S11 Suppl. 2.) reported usage of a Full Moon BioSystems slide for calibration. Inspired by the Shi et al. work, we have calibrated microarr...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2908103/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20594322 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-361 |
_version_ | 1782184156284846080 |
---|---|
author | Pozhitkov, Alexander E |
author_facet | Pozhitkov, Alexander E |
author_sort | Pozhitkov, Alexander E |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Calibration of a microarray scanner is critical for accurate interpretation of microarray results. Shi et al. (BMC Bioinformatics, 2005, 6, Art. No. S11 Suppl. 2.) reported usage of a Full Moon BioSystems slide for calibration. Inspired by the Shi et al. work, we have calibrated microarray scanners in our previous research. We were puzzled however, that most of the signal intensities from a biological sample fell below the sensitivity threshold level determined by the calibration slide. This conundrum led us to re-investigate the quality of calibration provided by the Full Moon BioSystems slide as well as the accuracy of the analysis performed by Shi et al. METHODS: Signal intensities were recorded on three different microarray scanners at various photomultiplier gain levels using the same calibration slide from Full Moon BioSystems. Data analysis was conducted on raw signal intensities without normalization or transformation of any kind. Weighted least-squares method was used to fit the data. RESULTS: We found that initial analysis performed by Shi et al. did not take into account autofluorescence of the Full Moon BioSystems slide, which led to a grossly distorted microarray scanner response. Our analysis revealed that a power-law function, which is explicitly accounting for the slide autofluorescence, perfectly described a relationship between signal intensities and fluorophore quantities. CONCLUSIONS: Microarray scanners respond in a much less distorted fashion than was reported by Shi et al. Full Moon BioSystems calibration slides are inadequate for performing calibration. We recommend against using these slides. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2908103 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-29081032010-07-22 Scanner calibration revisited Pozhitkov, Alexander E BMC Bioinformatics Correspondence BACKGROUND: Calibration of a microarray scanner is critical for accurate interpretation of microarray results. Shi et al. (BMC Bioinformatics, 2005, 6, Art. No. S11 Suppl. 2.) reported usage of a Full Moon BioSystems slide for calibration. Inspired by the Shi et al. work, we have calibrated microarray scanners in our previous research. We were puzzled however, that most of the signal intensities from a biological sample fell below the sensitivity threshold level determined by the calibration slide. This conundrum led us to re-investigate the quality of calibration provided by the Full Moon BioSystems slide as well as the accuracy of the analysis performed by Shi et al. METHODS: Signal intensities were recorded on three different microarray scanners at various photomultiplier gain levels using the same calibration slide from Full Moon BioSystems. Data analysis was conducted on raw signal intensities without normalization or transformation of any kind. Weighted least-squares method was used to fit the data. RESULTS: We found that initial analysis performed by Shi et al. did not take into account autofluorescence of the Full Moon BioSystems slide, which led to a grossly distorted microarray scanner response. Our analysis revealed that a power-law function, which is explicitly accounting for the slide autofluorescence, perfectly described a relationship between signal intensities and fluorophore quantities. CONCLUSIONS: Microarray scanners respond in a much less distorted fashion than was reported by Shi et al. Full Moon BioSystems calibration slides are inadequate for performing calibration. We recommend against using these slides. BioMed Central 2010-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC2908103/ /pubmed/20594322 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-361 Text en Copyright ©2010 Pozhitkov; 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 | Correspondence Pozhitkov, Alexander E Scanner calibration revisited |
title | Scanner calibration revisited |
title_full | Scanner calibration revisited |
title_fullStr | Scanner calibration revisited |
title_full_unstemmed | Scanner calibration revisited |
title_short | Scanner calibration revisited |
title_sort | scanner calibration revisited |
topic | Correspondence |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2908103/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20594322 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-361 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pozhitkovalexandere scannercalibrationrevisited |