Cargando…
False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study
BACKGROUND: High-throughput screening using RNAi is a powerful gene discovery method but is often complicated by false positive and false negative results. Whereas false positive results associated with RNAi reagents has been a matter of extensive study, the issue of false negatives has received les...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3036618/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21251254 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-12-50 |
_version_ | 1782197875499859968 |
---|---|
author | Booker, Matthew Samsonova, Anastasia A Kwon, Young Flockhart, Ian Mohr, Stephanie E Perrimon, Norbert |
author_facet | Booker, Matthew Samsonova, Anastasia A Kwon, Young Flockhart, Ian Mohr, Stephanie E Perrimon, Norbert |
author_sort | Booker, Matthew |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: High-throughput screening using RNAi is a powerful gene discovery method but is often complicated by false positive and false negative results. Whereas false positive results associated with RNAi reagents has been a matter of extensive study, the issue of false negatives has received less attention. RESULTS: We performed a meta-analysis of several genome-wide, cell-based Drosophila RNAi screens, together with a more focused RNAi screen, and conclude that the rate of false negative results is at least 8%. Further, we demonstrate how knowledge of the cell transcriptome can be used to resolve ambiguous results and how the number of false negative results can be reduced by using multiple, independently-tested RNAi reagents per gene. CONCLUSIONS: RNAi reagents that target the same gene do not always yield consistent results due to false positives and weak or ineffective reagents. False positive results can be partially minimized by filtering with transcriptome data. RNAi libraries with multiple reagents per gene also reduce false positive and false negative outcomes when inconsistent results are disambiguated carefully. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-3036618 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-30366182011-02-24 False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study Booker, Matthew Samsonova, Anastasia A Kwon, Young Flockhart, Ian Mohr, Stephanie E Perrimon, Norbert BMC Genomics Research Article BACKGROUND: High-throughput screening using RNAi is a powerful gene discovery method but is often complicated by false positive and false negative results. Whereas false positive results associated with RNAi reagents has been a matter of extensive study, the issue of false negatives has received less attention. RESULTS: We performed a meta-analysis of several genome-wide, cell-based Drosophila RNAi screens, together with a more focused RNAi screen, and conclude that the rate of false negative results is at least 8%. Further, we demonstrate how knowledge of the cell transcriptome can be used to resolve ambiguous results and how the number of false negative results can be reduced by using multiple, independently-tested RNAi reagents per gene. CONCLUSIONS: RNAi reagents that target the same gene do not always yield consistent results due to false positives and weak or ineffective reagents. False positive results can be partially minimized by filtering with transcriptome data. RNAi libraries with multiple reagents per gene also reduce false positive and false negative outcomes when inconsistent results are disambiguated carefully. BioMed Central 2011-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC3036618/ /pubmed/21251254 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-12-50 Text en Copyright ©2011 Booker et al; 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 Article Booker, Matthew Samsonova, Anastasia A Kwon, Young Flockhart, Ian Mohr, Stephanie E Perrimon, Norbert False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study |
title | False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study |
title_full | False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study |
title_fullStr | False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study |
title_full_unstemmed | False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study |
title_short | False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study |
title_sort | false negative rates in drosophila cell-based rnai screens: a case study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3036618/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21251254 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-12-50 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bookermatthew falsenegativeratesindrosophilacellbasedrnaiscreensacasestudy AT samsonovaanastasiaa falsenegativeratesindrosophilacellbasedrnaiscreensacasestudy AT kwonyoung falsenegativeratesindrosophilacellbasedrnaiscreensacasestudy AT flockhartian falsenegativeratesindrosophilacellbasedrnaiscreensacasestudy AT mohrstephaniee falsenegativeratesindrosophilacellbasedrnaiscreensacasestudy AT perrimonnorbert falsenegativeratesindrosophilacellbasedrnaiscreensacasestudy |