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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Booker, Matthew, Samsonova, Anastasia A, Kwon, Young, Flockhart, Ian, Mohr, Stephanie E, Perrimon, Norbert
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