Evaluation of five different cDNA labeling methods for microarrays using spike controls

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Several different cDNA labeling methods have been developed for microarray based gene expression analysis. We have examined the accuracy and reproducibility of such five commercially available methods in detection of predetermined ra...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Steen Vidar M, Eiken Hans, Badiee Azadeh, Løvlie Roger
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2003-12-01
Series:BMC Biotechnology
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6750/3/23
id doaj-7bd764589a7941edb43833bfe6b9a088
record_format Article
spelling doaj-7bd764589a7941edb43833bfe6b9a0882020-11-25T03:24:50ZengBMCBMC Biotechnology1472-67502003-12-01312310.1186/1472-6750-3-23Evaluation of five different cDNA labeling methods for microarrays using spike controlsSteen Vidar MEiken HansBadiee AzadehLøvlie Roger<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Several different cDNA labeling methods have been developed for microarray based gene expression analysis. We have examined the accuracy and reproducibility of such five commercially available methods in detection of predetermined ratio values from target spike mRNAs (A. thaliana) in a background of total RNA. The five different labeling methods were: direct labeling (CyScribe), indirect labeling (FairPlay™ – aminoallyl), two protocols with dendrimer technology (3DNA<sup>® </sup>Array 50™ and 3DNA<sup>® </sup>submicro™), and hapten-antibody enzymatic labeling (Micromax™ TSA™). Ten spike controls were mixed to give expected Cy5/Cy3 ratios in the range 0.125 to 6.0. The amounts of total RNA used in the labeling reactions ranged from 5 – 50 μg.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The 3DNA array 50 and CyScribe labeling methods performed best with respect to relative deviation from the expected values (16% and 17% respectively). These two methods also displayed the best overall accuracy and reproducibility. The FairPlay method had the lowest total experimental variation (22%), but the estimated values were consistently higher than the expected values (36%). TSA had both the largest experimental variation and the largest deviation from the expected values (45% and 48% respectively).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We demonstrate the usefulness of spike controls in validation and comparison of cDNA labeling methods for microarray experiments.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6750/3/23
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Steen Vidar M
Eiken Hans
Badiee Azadeh
Løvlie Roger
spellingShingle Steen Vidar M
Eiken Hans
Badiee Azadeh
Løvlie Roger
Evaluation of five different cDNA labeling methods for microarrays using spike controls
BMC Biotechnology
author_facet Steen Vidar M
Eiken Hans
Badiee Azadeh
Løvlie Roger
author_sort Steen Vidar M
title Evaluation of five different cDNA labeling methods for microarrays using spike controls
title_short Evaluation of five different cDNA labeling methods for microarrays using spike controls
title_full Evaluation of five different cDNA labeling methods for microarrays using spike controls
title_fullStr Evaluation of five different cDNA labeling methods for microarrays using spike controls
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of five different cDNA labeling methods for microarrays using spike controls
title_sort evaluation of five different cdna labeling methods for microarrays using spike controls
publisher BMC
series BMC Biotechnology
issn 1472-6750
publishDate 2003-12-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Several different cDNA labeling methods have been developed for microarray based gene expression analysis. We have examined the accuracy and reproducibility of such five commercially available methods in detection of predetermined ratio values from target spike mRNAs (A. thaliana) in a background of total RNA. The five different labeling methods were: direct labeling (CyScribe), indirect labeling (FairPlay™ – aminoallyl), two protocols with dendrimer technology (3DNA<sup>® </sup>Array 50™ and 3DNA<sup>® </sup>submicro™), and hapten-antibody enzymatic labeling (Micromax™ TSA™). Ten spike controls were mixed to give expected Cy5/Cy3 ratios in the range 0.125 to 6.0. The amounts of total RNA used in the labeling reactions ranged from 5 – 50 μg.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The 3DNA array 50 and CyScribe labeling methods performed best with respect to relative deviation from the expected values (16% and 17% respectively). These two methods also displayed the best overall accuracy and reproducibility. The FairPlay method had the lowest total experimental variation (22%), but the estimated values were consistently higher than the expected values (36%). TSA had both the largest experimental variation and the largest deviation from the expected values (45% and 48% respectively).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We demonstrate the usefulness of spike controls in validation and comparison of cDNA labeling methods for microarray experiments.</p>
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6750/3/23
work_keys_str_mv AT steenvidarm evaluationoffivedifferentcdnalabelingmethodsformicroarraysusingspikecontrols
AT eikenhans evaluationoffivedifferentcdnalabelingmethodsformicroarraysusingspikecontrols
AT badieeazadeh evaluationoffivedifferentcdnalabelingmethodsformicroarraysusingspikecontrols
AT løvlieroger evaluationoffivedifferentcdnalabelingmethodsformicroarraysusingspikecontrols
_version_ 1724599560758624256