Livestock Transcriptomics: Quantitative mRNA Analytics in Molecular Endocrinology and Physiology Habilitation submitted to
the Faculty Center of Life and Food Sciences,
Abstract Molecular technologies are currently evolving rapidly in
agricultural and veterinary sciences. This results in an immense
progress in the accumulation of new data potentially useful for
molecular diagnostics in farm animal physiology, immunology, diseases
and new breeding strategies. While we are still at the “very beginning”
of understanding genomics, transcriptomics and proteomics in relation
to animal physiology, this development has dramatically changed our
perspectives in research during the last decade. It can be foreseen,
that the application of sophisticated rather than simple methods will
be necessary for numerous diagnostic questions. One of this highly
sophisticated
methodologies is the quantitative assessment of target nucleic acids,
mostly
performed as quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on DNA level
or
combined with reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) to investigate the
transcriptome on RNA level. This review will introduce the state of the
art in quantitative RT-PCR using real-time RT-PCR on the field of
livestock molecular endocrinology and physiology.
Introduction To investigate local tissue specific expression even in
tissues with low abundances, very sensitive methods are required which
allow reliable mRNA quantification. Because of its high sensitivity,
RT-PCR is being increasingly applied to quantify physiologically
relevant changes in gene expression. RT-PCR has a detection limit 10-
to 100-fold better than other methods, e.g.
RNA-Protection-Assay or Northern-Hybridisation respectively (1-4). It
offers a new dimension in the detection of rare RNA by amplifying a
single stranded cDNA after reverse transcription. The RT-PCR
quantification
technique of choice depends on the target sequence, the expected range
of the mRNA amount present in the tissue, the degree of accuracy
required, and on the question whether quantification needs to be
relative or absolute.
Externally standardised RT-PCR with quantification on
ethidium bromide stained gels followed by densitometry is widely used,
but the degree of accuracy is limited and the quantification is more
relative than absolute (4).
Today the microarray technology is a powerful technique in order to
analyse
the gene expression of thousands of genes (up to 20000) in a short
time.
Presently the microarrays or gene chips of cDNA and oligo-nucleotide
type
are available from several manufactors. Problems encountered include
inconsistent fidelity, high variability, sensitivity not sufficient for
low abundant expressed genes (like some growth factors and their
receptors),
discrepancy in “fold-changes calculation” and lack of specificity for
different
isoforms or differentially expressed genes (5-9).
For an exact quantitative measurement of low abundant gene
expression only a few PCR methods allow reliable mRNA quantification.
The aim of a full quantitative method is to estimate, as exact and
reliable as possible, the number
or target molecules in the sample. At present the following RT-PCR
methods are suitable for such a sensitive quantification.
A) Internally standardised competitive RT-PCR measured by
HPLC separation and UV detection (10, 11) or high resolution gel
electrophoresis followed by densitometric
analysis (12,13): In a competitive RT-PCR, a reference RNA mutant is
reverse transcribed and co-amplified in the same reaction tube with
the native mRNA sequence of interest. Internally standardised RT-PCR
is a very time consuming and laborious technique. It is generally
believed
to yield the most precise results, because all parameters throughout
RT-PCR
act on both the analyte and reference mutant.
B) Externally standardised RT-PCR with online-detection
using LightCycler SYBR ® Green I
(Molecular Probes) technology (14-17): real-time RT-PCR with SYBR
® Green I detection produces reliable and rapid results. Due to
the use of an external standard curve, the amplification efficiencies
for the calibration curve and the analyt must be equal for accurate
quantification.
C) Externally standardised RT-PCR with online-detection using specific hybridisation probes (18-20): This detection format is based on various fluorescence detection formats, e.g. fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET). D) DNA array technologies and real-time RT-PCR: The
microarray based screening of tissue specific gene expression and
confirmation of putative candidate target genes
by kinetic RT-PCR represents a powerful and optimal combination (21,
22). Hereby the advantages of both quantification systems can be added
- the high throughput capacity of the microarray platform as well as
sensitivity and specificity of the real-time RT-PCR platform (5-9).
Today real-time RT-PCR (or kinetic RT-PCR) is increasingly
used because of its high sensitivity, good reproducibility, and wide
dynamic quantification range (1-4). The first practical kinetic PCR
technology, the 5’-nuclease assay, was established 1993 and combines
the exponential PCR amplification of a specific transcript with the
monitoring of newly synthesized DNA in each performed PCR cycle
(14-17). It is the most sensitive method for the detection and
quantification of gene expression levels, in particular for low
abundant transcripts
in tissues with low RNA concentrations, from limited tissue samples,
and
for the elucidation of small changes in mRNA expression levels (4, 19,
20, 23, 24). While kinetic RT-PCR has a tremendous potential for
analytical and quantitative applications, a comprehensive understanding
of its underlying principles is important. Fidelity of real-time RT-PCR
is associated with
its “true” specificity, sensitivity, reproducibility, robustness and,
as
a fully reliable quantitative method, it suffers from the problems
inherent
in RT and PCR, e.g. Amplification of unspecific products,
primer-dimers,
amplification efficiencies, hetero-duplex formation, etc. (19).
This review analyses the mRNA quantification analytics and
quantification strategies in real-time RT-PCR and describes all
corresponding markers of a successful real-time RT-PCR. The following
aspects are discussed in detail: RNA extraction, reverse transcription,
general quantification strategies: absolute and
relative quantification, efficiency calculation, normalisation of
expression
results, data processing and statistical comparison. Further this
review
turns into practical considerations with focus on specificity,
sensitivity,
variability, reproducibility and the experimental design of the
experiments.
Useful real-time RT-PCR applications in animal molecular endocrinology
and molecular physiology are discussed and descriptive examples are
shown
in figures. The corresponding tables will be shown exclusively in the
appendix,
where some “papers by Pfaffl et al.” are shown in full length. All
chapters
described and the corresponding literature is also accessible on the
Gene
Quantification web page.
RNA extraction The integrity of purified RNA is critical to all gene
expression analysis techniques. The preparation of intact cellular
total RNA or pure mRNA is the first critical step in gene
quantification. For successful and reliable diagnostic use, real-time
RT-PCR needs high quality, DNA free, and undegraded RNA (25, 26).
Accurate quantification and quality assessment (30) of the starting RNA
sample is particularly important for absolute quantification methods
that normalize specific mRNA expression levels against total RNA
(‘molecules/g total
RNA’ or ‘transcript concentrations/g total RNA’). RNA, especially long
mRNA up to 10 kb (25), is easily degraded by cleavage of RNAes during
tissue sampling, RNA purification and RNA storage. The source of RNA,
sampling techniques (biopsy material, purified somatic cells from
complex matrices, e.g. blood and milk, single cell sampling, laser
micro-dissection) (27-30) as well as RNA isolation techniques (either
total RNA or poly-adenylated RNA isolation techniques) often vary
significantly between processing laboratories (26).
In agricultural and veterinary research RNA extracted from
mammary gland, especially during lactation period (29, 30), adipose or
collagen rich tissues, tissue sampled after long lack time at the
slaughterhouse (10-13) often has a lower yield and is of lesser
quality, and contains partly degraded RNA sub-fractions, especially the
messenger RNA (mRNA) fraction (own unpublished results). Particular RNA
extraction techniques can act more effectively
on one specific tissue type compared to another one, and result in up
to
10-fold variations in total RNA yield (26).
In figure 1 the livestock transcriptome (various cattle
tissue total RNA) is characterised and all sub-fractions are described.
As shown, most genes are transcribed at very low abundant mRNA levels
under 20 copies per cell (www.qiagen.com).
Therefore highly sensitive quantification methods are necessary to
perform a precise and reliable quantification of growth factors,
hormones, their corresponding receptors and enzymes being important for
understanding animal endocrinology and physiology.
Figure 1:
Characterisation of the transcriptome isolated from numerous cattle
tissue samples
(29, 30). Isolated
RNA may contain tissue enzyme inhibitors that result in reduced RT
and PCR reaction efficiencies and generate unreliable and wrong
quantification results (25, 26). Most RNA preparations are contaminated
with DNA and
protein at very low levels. Even high quality commercially obtained RNA
contain detectable amounts of DNA (26). While this is not a problem for
some applications, the tremendous amplification power of kinetic PCR
may
result in even the smallest amount of DNA contamination to interfering
with the desired “specific amplification”. To confirm the absence of
residual
DNA either a “minus-RT” or „water control“ should always be included in
the experimental design. It may be necessary to treat the RNA sample
with
commercially available RNAse-free DNAse, to get rid of residual DNA.
However,
unspecific side reactions of the DNAse often result in RNA degradation
(own unpublished results). It is always necessary to remove the DNAse
prior to any RT or PCR step. Furthermore, the design of the PCR product
should incorporate at least one exon-exon splice junction to allow a
product obtained from the cDNA to be distinguished on electrophoresis
from genomic DNA contamination (4, 10-13, 19, 20). Processed
pseudogenes
[e.g. b-actin, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH), 18S
rRNA] can be present and lead to confusion in data interpretation. In
addition, intron-lacking pseudogenes (e.g. b-actin) with equal sequence
length to endogenous mRNA have been described (31-37). They prevent a
distinction between products originating from genomic DNA versus mRNA,
which poses a significant problem on qualitative and quantitative gene
quantification. Therefore, various housekeeping genes must be tested or
multiplex assays of reference genes as internal controls for the
assessment of RNA and cDNA quality must be performed (38-42).
The second step in quantitative
RT-PCR is the production of a single-stranded (ss) complementary DNA
copy
(cDNA) of the RNA through the reverse transcriptase (RT) and its
dynamic
range, sensitivity and specificity are of prime consideration for a
successful
kinetic RT-PCR assay (43). For many quantitative applications, MMLV H-
RT
is the enzyme of choice (44-47), as its cDNA synthesis rate is up to
50-fold
greater than that of AMV (own unpublished results). Newly available
thermo
stable RNAse H- RT maintains its activity up to 70°C, thus
permitting increased specificity and efficiency of first primer
annealing (4,
44). However, this enzyme may be less robust than more conventional
ones
as it appears to be more sensitive to inhibitors present in RNA
preparation (44-47).
The RT step is the source of most of the variability in a
kinetic RT-PCR experiment and for each enzyme the specific reaction
conditions has to be optimised. Salt contamination, alcohol, phenol and
other inhibitors carried over from the RNA isolation process can affect
the apparent RT efficiency (19, 48-52). Another source of variability
is the choice of priming method
used to initiate cDNA synthesis, which can be either target
gene-specific
or non-specific. Target gene specific primers work well in conjunction
with elevated RT reaction temperatures to eliminate spurious
transcripts
(53, 54). The same anti-sense (reverse primer) is used for the
subsequent
PCR assay in conjunction with the corresponding gene-specific sense
primer
(forward primer). However, the use of gene-specific primers
necessitates
a separate RT reaction for each gene of interest. It cannot be assumed
that different reactions have the same cDNA synthesis efficiency; the
result
can be high variability during multiple RT reactions.
To circumvent this high inter-assay variations in RT, target
gene unspecific primers, e.g. random-hexamer, -octamer or -decamer
primers, can be used and a cDNA pool can be synthesized. Similarly,
poly-T oligo-nucleotides (consisting solely of 16-25 deoxythymidine
residues) can anneal to the poly-adenylated 3-’ (poly-A) tail found on
most mRNA (19, 47). The cDNA pools synthesized with unspecific primers
can be split into a number of different target-specific kinetic PCR
assays. This maximizes the number of genes that can be assayed from a
single cDNA pool, derived from one small RNA sample. Therefore
the gene expression results are directly comparable between the applied
assays, at least within one and the same RT pool. In conclusion, a rank
order of RT efficiency can be shown for the applied different primers
for
ONE specific gene (own unpublished results):
random hexamer primers > poly-dt primer > gene specific primer Importantly, not only RNA quantity and quality, but also
yield and quality of cDNA can be highly variable. Certainly, there is
evidence that cDNA yield from sequences near the 5’-end of partially
degraded mRNA is significantly less than from sequences near the poly-A
tail and assays aimed at identifying
RNA degradation are being developed (3, 25, 51, 56). Thus, reliable
internal quality control of cDNA synthesis is essential. Controls are
generally
performed by PCR amplification of reference genes, mostly common
housekeeping
genes GAPDH, albumin, actins, tubulins, cyclophilin, microglobulins,
18S
ribosomal RNA (rRNA) or 28S rRNA (40, 52-57). The reference genes used
as well as the expression levels vary between different laboratories,
and only few of them have been critically evaluated (see
Normalisation).
The efficacy of kinetic RT-PCR is measured by its
specificity, low background fluorescence, steep fluorescence increase
and high amplification efficiency, and high level plateau (58).
Typically the PCR can be divided in four characteristic phases as shown
in figure 2 (59):
1st phase is hidden
under the background fluorescence, where an exponential amplification
is expected;
2 nd phase with exponential amplification, that can be detected above the background; 3rd phase with linear amplification efficiency and a steep increase of fluorescence; 4th phase or plateau phase, defined as the attenuation in the rate of exponential product accumulation, which is seen concomitantly in later cycles (58-60);
Figure 2: The
four characteristic phases of PCR, evaluated by real-time PCR
fluorescence acquisition (59, 60). The amount of amplified target is directly proportional to
the input amount of
target only during the exponential phase of PCR amplification. Hence
the key factor in the quantitative ability of kinetic RT-PCR is that it
measures the product of the target gene within that phase (24, 59,
61-64).
Since data acquisition and analysis are performed in the same tube,
this
increases sample throughput, reduces carryover contamination and
removes
post-PCR processing as a potential source of error (65).
In contrast, during the plateau phase of the PCR there is no
direct relation of
„DNA input“ to „amplified target“; hence classical RT-PCR assays have
to be stopped at least in linear phase (61, 62, 66). The exponential
range of amplification has to be determined for each transcript
empirically
by amplifying equivalent amounts of cDNA over various cycles of the
PCR or by amplifying dilutions of cDNA over the same number of PCR
cycles
(24). Amplified RT-PCR end product is later detected by ethidium
bromide
gel staining, radioactivity labelling, fluorescence labelling, high
performance liquid chromatography, southern blotting, densitometric
analysis,
or other post amplification detection methods. This step wise
accumulation of post-PCR variability leads to semi-quantitative results
with high intra-assay (around 30-40%) and inter-assay variability
(around 50-70%) in end-point detection assays, including competitive
RT-PCR, performed earlier (10-13, 67-71). Finally, whereas real-time
methods have a dynamic range of greater than eight orders of magnitude
(60, 72), the dynamic range of the endpoint assays is at best two
orders of magnitude (10-13).
The third critical step
in kinetic RT-PCR is the correct detection chemistry. Two general
methods for the quantitative detection of the amplicon became
established:
specific double strand (ds) DNA binding agents or gene specific
fluorescent
probes (3, 14-16, 72-75), e.g. based on fluorescence resonance energy
transfer (FRET) (18, 61, 62). The best-know probe-based system is ABI
TaqMan (16, 17, 19, 20, 75, 76) which makes use of the 5'-exonuclease
activity of Taq polymerase to quantify target sequences in the samples.
Probe hydrolysis separates fluorophore and quencher and results in an
increased
fluorescence signal, called „Förster type energy transfer“ (77,
78).
The alternative is a non-sequence specific fluorescent intercalating ds
DNA binding dye e.g. SYBR Green I (Molecular Probes) or ethidium
bromide
(79). For single PCR product reactions with well designed primers, SYBR
Green
I can work extremely well, with spurious non-specific background only
showing
up in very late cycles (4, 63, 64, 80, 85). Among the real-time
detection
chemistry, SYBR Green I and TaqMan assays produced comparable dynamic
range
and sensitivity, while SYBR Green I detection was more precise and
produced
a more linear decay plot than the TaqMan probe detection (24). For more
detailed
information about real-time PCR detection chemistry on real-time
platforms,
e.g. using hybridisation probes, molecular beacons or scorpions, please
visit
the following link: http://www.wzw.tum.de/gene-quantification/chemistry.html.
The PCR machines differ in sample capacity, up to 96-well
and 384-well standard format, others process only 32 samples and
require specialized glass capillaries, excitation method (lasers,
others broad spectrum light sources with
various filters), and fluorescence acquisition channels. There are also
platform-specific differences in how the software processes data with
focus on absolute or relative quantification strategies (76, 81, 82).
For at least two systems and chemistries, the ABI PRISM 7700 using
„TaqMan
Probes“ and Roche’s LightCycler using „Hybridisation Probes“, there is
little difference in accuracy and performance (24). A detailed
description
of all real-time PCR platforms is available under http://www.wzw.tum.de/
gene-quantification/platform.html.
Two strategies can be
performed in real-time RT-PCR: The levels of expressed genes may be
measured by absolute or relative quantitative real-time RT-PCR (figure
3). Absolute quantification relates the PCR signal to input copy number
using a calibration curve, while relative quantification measures the
relative change in mRNA expression levels. The reliability of an
absolute real-time RT-PCR assay depends on the condition of „identical“
amplification efficiency for both the native target and the calibration
curve in RT reaction and in following kinetic PCR (75-77). This problem
was also evident in competitive RT-PCR, where an „identical“
amplification efficiencies was a necessary precondition for a reliable
RT-PCR (10-13, 29, 30). Nowadays a relative quantification is easier to
perform than absolute quantification because there is no need for a
calibration curve. It is based on the expression levels of a target
gene versus a housekeeping gene (reference gene or control gene) and in
theory is adequate for most purposes in animal sciences to investigate
physiological changes in gene expression levels (4, 69, 72-74). The
units used to express relative quantities are irrelevant, and
the relative quantities can be compared across multiple real-time
RT-PCR experiments (1, 3, 41, 42).
Figure 3: Quantification
strategies in real-time PCR (http://www.wzw.tum.de/gene-quantification/).
Absolute quantification Calibration curves allow
the generation of highly specific, sensitive and reproducible data (3,
4,
41, 42, 60). However, the external calibration curve model has to be
thoroughly
validated as the accuracy of absolute quantification in real-time
RT-PCR
depends entirely on the accuracy of the standard material. Standard
design,
production, determination of the exact standard concentration and
stability
over long storage time is not straightforward and can be problematic.
The
dynamic range of the calibration curve performed can be up to nine
orders of magnitude from <101 to >1010 start molecules, depending
on the applied purity of the standard material. The calibration curves
used in absolute quantification can be based on known concentrations of
DNA standard molecules, e.g. recombinant plasmid DNA (recDNA) (figure
4), in vitro transcribed recombinant RNA (recRNA), genomic DNA, RT-PCR
product, commercially synthesized big oligo-nucleotide (3, 4, 41, 42,
83). Stability and reproducibility
in kinetic RT-PCR depends on the type of standard used. Cloned recDNA
and
genomic DNA are very stable and generate highly reproducible standard
curves
even after a long storage time, in comparison to freshly synthesized
recRNA
standard material.
Figure 4: Characteristics of an external androgen
receptor (AR) calibration curve on recDNA
basis: detection limit, quantification limit and quantification range
using SYBR Green I technology (83).
Furthermore, the longer templates derived from recDNA and
genomic DNA mimic the
average native mRNA length of about 2 kb better than shorter templates
derived from RT-PCR product or oligo-nucleotides. They are more
resistant
against unspecific cleavage and proofreading activity of polymerase
during
reaction setup and in kinetic PCR (own unpublished results). One
advantage
of the shorter templates and commercially available templates is an
accurate
knowledge of its concentration and length. Second shorter templates
avoid the very time consuming production process of standard material:
standard synthesis, purification, cloning, transformation, plasmid
preparation, linearisation, verification and exact determination of
standard concentration (3, 4, 42).
DNA based calibration curves are subject to the PCR step
only, unlike the “unknown mRNA samples” that must first be reverse
transcribed. This increases the potential for variability of the RT-PCR
results and the amplification results may not be strictly comparable
with the results from the unknown samples. However, the problem of
sensitivity of the RT-PCR to small variations in the reaction setup is
always lurking in the background as a potential drawback to this simple
procedure. Therefore, quantification with external standards requires
careful optimisation of its precision (replicates in
the same kinetic PCR run – intra-assay variation) and reproducibility
(replicates
in separate kinetic PCR runs – inter-assay variation) in order to
understand
the limitations within the given application (3, 4, 60, 70).
A recombinant RNA (recRNA) standard that was synthesized in
vitro from a cloned RT-PCR fragment in plasmid DNA is one option (4, 7,
10-13, 84). However, identical RT efficiency, as well as real-time PCR
amplification efficiencies for calibration curve and target cDNA will
have to be tested and confirmed, if the recDNA is to provide a valid
standard for mRNA quantification (4). This is because only the specific
recRNA molecules are present during RT and the kinetics of cDNA
synthesis are not like those in native RNA (the unknown sample) that
also contain a high percentage of natural occurring sub-fractions, e.g.
ribosomal RNA (rRNA, ~80%) and transfer RNA (tRNA, 10-15%), shown in
figure 1. These missing RNA sub-fractions can influence the cDNA
synthesis rate and in consequence RT efficiency rises and calibration
curves are then overestimated in gene quantification (3, 4, 85, 86). To
compensate for background effects and mimic a natural RNA distribution
like in native total RNA, total RNA isolated from bacterial or insect
cell lines, can
be used. Alternatively commercially available RNA sources can be used
as
RNA background, e.g. poly-A RNA or tRNA, but they do not represent a
native RNA distribution over all RNA sub-fractions (3, 4, 42). Earlier
results suggest, that a minimum of RNA background is generally needed
and that
it enhances RT synthesis efficiency rate. Low concentrations of recRNA
used in calibration curves should always be buffered with moderate
concentrations of unspecific background or carrier RNA, otherwise the
low amounts can be degraded easily by RNAse. Very high background
concentrations had
a more significant suppression effect in RT synthesis rate and in later
real-time PCR efficiency (4).
No matter how accurately the concentration of the standard
material is known, the final result is always reported relatively
compared to a defined unit of interest: e.g. copies per defined ng of
total RNA, copies per genome (6.4 pg DNA), copies per cell, copies per
gram of tissue, copies per ml blood, etc. (3, 42, 57, 70). If absolute
changes in copy number are important then the denominator still must be
shown to be invariable across the comparison. The quality of gene
quantification data cannot be better than the quality of the
denominator itself. Any denominator variation will obscure real
changes, produce artificial changes and wrong quantification results.
Careful use of controls is critical to demonstrate that the choice of
denominator was a wise one (42). Under certain circumstances, absolute
quantification models can also be normalized using suitable and
unregulated references or housekeeping genes (see normalisation).
External standard quantification is the method of choice for
the nucleic acid quantification, independent of any hardware platform
used. The specificity, sensitivity, linearity and reproducibility allow
absolute and accurate quantification of molecules even in tissues with
low mRNA abundance (<100 mRNA molecules) and
a detection down to a few molecules (<10 mRNA molecules) (4, 29, 30,
62). The dynamic range of an optimally validated and optimised external
standardized real-time RT-PCR assay can accurately detect target mRNA
up to nine orders of magnitude or a billion-fold range with high assay
linearity (Pearson correlation coefficient; r>0.99) (4, 29, 30, 62).
In general a mean intra-assay variation of 10-20% (n = 7x3) and a mean
inter-assay variation of 15-30% (n = 7x7) (figure 5) on molecule basis
(maximal 2-4% variability on crossing point [CP] basis, respectively)
is
realistic over the wide dynamic range, as shown for estrogen receptor
(ER)
kinetic RT-PCR, performed on the LightCycler (83, 87-89).
Figure 5: Mean
intra-assay (n = 7x3) and inter-assay variation (n = 7x7) of estrogen
receptor (ER) alpha real-time RT-PCR assay, using externally
standardised recDNA calibration curve (73-75, 83). At high (> 107) and low (< 103)
template copy input levels the assay variability is higher than in the
range between the two (4, 49, 51). At very low copy numbers, under 20
copies per tube, the random variation due to sampling error
(Poisson´s error law) becomes significant (59, 62-64). A recDNA
calibration curve model can quantify precisely only cDNA molecules
derived from the RT step; it says nothing about the conversion to cDNA
of the mRNA molecules present in the native total RNA sample.
Variability in cDNA synthesis efficiency during reverse transcription
must
always be kept in mind. Therefore, a recRNA calibration curve model has
the advantage that both RNA templates undergo parallel RT and real-time
PCR steps. However, a direct comparison suggests that the recDNA
quantification model shows higher sensitivity, exhibits a larger
quantification range, has a higher reproducibility, and is more stable
than the recRNA model (4). Furthermore, recDNA external calibration
curves exhibit lower variation (intra-assay variation < 0.7%;
inter-assay variation < 2.6% on CP basis)
than the recRNA model (< 2.7% and < 4.5%, respectively). Clearly,
the
RT step has a profound affect on the overall result obtained from an
RT-PCR
assay and more thorough consideration of RT efficiency is needed.
The main
disadvantage of external standards is the lack of internal control
for RT and PCR inhibitors. All quantitative PCR methods assume that
the target and the sample amplify with similar efficiency (3, 90). The
risk with external standards is that some of the unknown samples may
contain substances that significantly reduce the efficiency of the PCR
reaction in the unknown samples. As discussed, sporadic RT and PCR
inhibitors
or different RNA/cDNA distributions can occur. A dilution series can be
run on the unknown samples and the inhibitory factors can often be
diluted
out, causing a non-linear standard curve (62, 79).
“Do we need to run a
calibration curve in each run ?” (62) and “Do we need a
calibration curve at all ?” (81, 82, 91) are frequently posed
questions, together with “What about the reproducibility between
the runs?” (http://www.idahotec.com/LightCycler_u/lectures/
quantification_on_lc.htm). Repeated runs of the same standard
curve give minor variations of a 2-3% in the slope (from which the
real-time PCR efficiency is calculated) and about 10% in the intercept
of calibration curve. Since the variation in the standard curve
correlates with variation in the unknowns, a detection of a 2-fold
difference over a wide range
of target concentrations is possible (62). The slope of the calibration
curve is more reproducible than the intercept, hence only a single
standard
point will be required to “re-register” a previously performed
calibration
curve level for the new unknowns. The curve can be imported into any
run,
as done in the LightCycler software (81, 82). Never changing variations
and 100% reproducibility are the big advantages of such a calibration
curve
import, but there are also disadvantages as variations of reagents,
primers
and probe (sequence alterations and fluorescence intensity), day-to-day
or sample-to-sample variations will not be covered in this „copy and
paste“
approach. Since these affect PCR efficiency, such an approach can
introduce
significant errors into the quantification.
The absolute quantification of specific transcripts was
applied in molecular endocrinology. We
have examined the tissue specific mRNA expression of estrogen receptors
(ER) ERa and ERb in various bovine tissues using real-time RT-PCR (83,
87-89). Knowledge of the distribution and regulation of ERb in various
tissues of ruminants are missing at this time. The available
publications
about ERb expression in bovine species are limited to the cattle
reproductive organs and to the sheep hypothalamus (92-95). However, a
more detailed
study of the tissue distribution of both ER subtypes is essential to
continue
investigations of their regulation and physiological function. It is
well
known that steroids lead to an increased synthesis of specific proteins
(96) and it is proposed that estradiol can stimulate via ERa its own
receptor
expression at least in the uterus (97). Goal of the study was to
evaluate
the deviating tissue sensitivities and the influence of the estrogenic
active preparation RALGRO on the tissue specific expression and
regulation
of both ER subtypes. RALGRO contains Zeranol (a-Zearalanol), a
derivative
of the mycotoxin Zearalenon, showing strong estrogenic and anabolic
effects,
and exhibits all symptoms of hyper-estrogenism in particular
reproductive and developmental disorders. Eight heifers were treated
over 8 weeks with multiple dose implantations.
Both real-time RT-PCR were ERa and ERb product specific, and
effective PCR amplification kinetic was shown by high PCR efficiency
per cycle. Assay sensitivities were confirmed by detection limits down
to 10 ssDNA molecules and
linear quantification ranges between 102 to 109 molecules. Intra- and
inter-assay variation of <19% to <30%, respectively, were
determined
over the entire quantification range (83, 87-89). The advantage of a
high temperature fluorescence acquisition in the 4th segment (60)
during the amplification program results in reliable and sensitive
ER subtype specific quantification with high linearity (Pearson
correlation
coefficient; r>0.995) over seven orders of magnitude. High
temperature
fluorescence acquisition melts the unspecific PCR products at 82°C
and 87°C respectively, eliminates the non-specific fluorescence
signal derived from primer dimers and ensures an accurate
quantification of the desired products. Expression results indicate the
existence of
both ER subtypes in all 15 investigated tissues and quantified mRNA
expression results are shown below as mean values with bi-directional
error bars
(figure 6.).
Figure 6: Tissue specific estrogen receptor (ER)
alpha (ERa) and ERb mRNA expression cluster from 15 heifers.
Transcripts were measured on molecule basis with real-time RT-PCR in 25
ng total RNA (n = 8) and quantified results are shown as mean with
bi-directional error bars (s.e.m.) (89).
All tissue exhibit a specific ERa and ERb expression pattern
and regulation under RALGRO treatment. With increasing Zeranol
concentrations a significant down-regulation of ERa mRNA expression
could be observed in jejunum (p<0.001) and kidney medulla
(p<0.05). Due to the given results of the mainly non-significant
relationship (except in kidney-medulla and jejunum) between Zeranol
treatment and ERa and ERb expression levels all expression data within
one tissue were pooled. The derived mean expression concentrations and
variations are characteristic for all investigated tissues and the
relation of both ER subtypes result in a tissue specific expression
cluster. In future, the presented ERa/ERb cluster with its tissue
specific variations will lead us to more detailed studies for a better
understanding of estrogen receptor regulation and physiology. Data show
high ERa expression rates in the classical estrogen sensitive tissues
and a wide ERa/ERb ratio (89). ERb transcripts were mainly expressed on
lower level. The dominant ERa
expression (ratio of 2.6) could also be shown in various brain regions,
including hypothalamus, pituitary gland and 6 different brain lobes
(own
unpublished results). No expression of ERa could be observed in bovine
endothelial cell preparations, whereas the ERb transcripts were
expressed
very low abundant (own unpublished results). The dominant role of ERa,
especially
in uterus explains why it was the first cloned ER as most purification
and
cloning and attempts were based on uterine tissue (89). Also in the
muscular
tissues both subtypes could be detected with a very wide expression
ratio,
especially in muscle parts which are involved in cattle allometric
growth
like neck and shoulder muscularity. The molecular basis for this
sexually
dimorphic muscle growth pattern might be attributed to relatively
higher
sensitivities to sexual steroids in this muscles. Above that, the
present
study implies that local differences in ERa expression might be one
promoting
factor for higher growth velocities and play a key role in allometric
growth.
The localisation and dominant expression of ERb in both kidney regions
and
in the jejunum leads to the hypothesis that ERb plays a dominant role
in
these tissues. ERa was already detected earlier in the bovine
gastrointestinal
tract (67), but ERb might be the major actor in the absorptive
processes.
However, any notations on physiological direct effects of estrogens on
gastrointestinal
tissues and kidney remain speculative, but there are some indications,
that
estrogens might influence the calcium transport.
These expression data support the hypothesis, that the ERb
may have different biological functions than ERa, especially in kidney
and the jejunum (89). In a
second study, in ten bovine gastrointestinal tract compartments, using
optimised primer pairs of numerous steroid receptors [androgen receptor
(AR), ERa, ERb and progesterone receptor (PR)] the data examined above
were confirmed (83). It reconfirms the bovine gastrointestinal tract
as target of steroid hormone action.
In a further collaborative study with A. Didier and A.
Tichopad (76) we investigated the bovine prion mRNA expression using
externally calibrated highly sensitive
externally standardized real-time RT-PCR with LightCycler instrument.
Total RNA was isolated from 16 different tissues, nine regions of the
central neural system (CNS) and seven peripheral organs (spleen, lymph
node, thymus, liver, muscle, kidney, lung). PrPc mRNA copy numbers
could
be determined in all tissues under study. In agreement with prior
studies
high mRNA levels were found in neocortex and cerebellum, calculated on
the
basis of mg tissue. As shown in figure 7 the lymphatic organs showed at
least
as high expression levels of prion mRNA as overall in the brain. Lowest
expression was detected in kidney. Results of our study provide insight
into the involvement of different organs in pathogenesis with respect
to
prion mRNA expression. LightCycler technology is currently considered
the
most precise method for nucleic acid quantification and showed to be
powerful
tool for further studies on prion diseases pathogenesis (80).
Figure 7: Mean
PrPc mRNA copy numbers in various bovine tissue on mg tissue basis
(76). Error lines indicate SD. To quantify all representative members of the somatotropic
axe is in newborn calves absolute quantification method was used (72).
This study was performed in cooperation with J. Blum and T.
Mircheva-Georgieva (University of Berne). The somatotropic axis is
mainly involved in the growth physiology and tissue differentiation in
numerous animal tissues during pre-natal and post-natal development.
The factors can act in an endocrine as well as in a para-/autocrine
way. To obtain highly accurate and reliable quantitative results in a
real-time RT-PCR a highly defined calibration curve is needed. We
designed and developed nine different calibration curves, based on
recDNA plasmid standards and established them on a constant real-time
PCR platform (LightCycler) for the following factors: growth hormone
receptor (GHR),
insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1, IGF-1 receptor (IGF-1R), IGF-2,
IGF-2
receptor (IGF-2R), insulin receptor (INSR), and IGF-binding proteins
(IGF-BP)
1, 2 and 3. The newly elucidated sequences of IGF-2 receptor in cattle
(see
appendix) was published in the sequences databases EMBL (European
Molecular
Biology Library; http://www.ebi.ac.uk/)
and GenBank (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Entrez/index.html).
Developed assays were applied in the LightCycler system on bovine
ileum and liver total RNA and showed high specificity and sensitivity
of quantification. All assays had a detection limit of under 35
recombinant
DNA molecules present in the capillary (see table in appendix). The
SYBR Green I determination resulted in a reliable and accurate
quantification
with high test linearity (Pearson correlation coefficient r > 0.99)
over seven orders of magnitude from <102 to >108 recombinant
DNA start molecules and an assay variation of maximal 5.3%.
Applicability
of the externally standardised exact quantification method was shown
by analysing mRNA levels in newborn calves: mRNA concentrations per
gram tissue of mRNA of IGF-1, IGF-1R, IGF-2, IGF-2R, GHR, INSR, and
IGFBP-1,
-2 and -3 were all different in liver and ileum and the traits
exhibited individual differences (72). Further experimental trials and
investigation on the somatotropic axis are in progress in Berne
(workgroup J. Blum) and Weihenstephan.
Relative quantification determines the changes in
steady-state mRNA levels of a gene across multiple samples and gives a
result relative to the levels of an internal control RNA. This
reference gene is often a housekeeping gene and can be co-amplified in
the same tube in a multiplex assay or can be amplified in a separate
tube (figure 3) (62, 73, 74). Therefore, relative quantification does
not require standards with known concentrations and the reference can
be any transcript, as long as its sequence is known (3, 42). Relative
quantification is based on the expression levels of a target gene
versus a reference gene and in many experiments is adequate for
investigating physiological
changes in gene expression levels. To calculate the expression of a
target
gene in relation to an adequate reference gene various mathematical
models
are established. Calculations are based on the comparison of the
distinct
cycle determined by various methods, e.g. crossing points (CP) or
threshold
values (Ct) at a constant level of fluorescence; or CP acquisition
according
to established mathematic algorithm. To date several mathematical
models
that calculate the relative expression ratio have been developed.
Relative
quantification models without efficiency correction are available and
published
(equations 1-2) (20, 76, 90).
equation 1 equation 2 More recently developed mathematical models with kinetic PCR
efficiency correction, like in equations 3-6 (81, 82, 98-101), allow
for a more precise quantification of the relative expression levels.
Further, the available models allow for the determination of single
transcription difference between ONE control
and only ONE sample, assayed in triplicates (n =1/3), e.g. LightCycler
Relative Quantification Software (82), or Q-Gene (102). For a group
wise comparison for up to 100 samples the software application REST and
REST-XL (99, 100) are relevant. In REST the relative expression ratio
of a target gene is computed, based on its calculated real-time PCR
efficiencies
(E) or alternatively on the static efficiency of E = 2, and the CP
difference (DCP) of one unknown sample (treatment) versus one control
(DCP control - treatment), shown in equation 3. Using REST and REST-XL
the relative calculation procedure is based on the MEAN CP of the
experimental groups (equation 4).
equation 3 equation 4 In these models the target gene expression is normalized by
a non regulated reference gene expression, e.g. derived from classical
and frequently described housekeeping genes (53-56). The crucial
problem in this relative approach is that the most common reference
gene transcripts from “so-called housekeeping genes”, whose mRNA
expression can be regulated and whose levels vary significantly with
treatment or between individuals (103-106). However, relative
quantification can generate useful and biologically relevant
information when used appropriately.
equation 5 equation 6 The validity, the variability and the reproducibility of the
relative quantification concept using REST was tested in numerous
experiments (99, 100). On the basis of
the previously published mathematical model (equation 3 and 4) the
relative expression ratios on the basis of group means for
metallothionein
gene versus reference gene GAPDH expression in a zinc deficiency
experiment
and tests the group ratio results for significance. Herein different
cDNA
input concentrations were tested (up to 3-fold differences = ±
300%)
to mimic these huge RT variations. It resulted in no significant
changes
of relative expression ratio evaluated by REST. Also the
reproducibility
of the developed mathematical model used was given, based on the exact
determination of real-time amplification efficiencies and low
LightCycler
CP variability documented. No significant differences between cDNA
starting
concentration on expression ratio could be found using relative
quantification
model (99, 100).
In the following cooperation with W. Windisch (University of
Vienna), the influence of Zinc on
the relative mRNA expression of zinc transporter proteins was
investigated (107). Zinc (Zn) is a small, hydrophobic, highly positive
charged ion (Zn2+), which can not cross biological membranes by passive
diffusion
(108). Therefore, specialized mechanisms are required in the organism
for both the Zn uptake and the Zn release. These active transport
processes
via Zn-binding ligands require energy for Zn transport and their
presence
can significantly affect Zn transport into the cells. The importance of
Zn in cell physiology is related mainly to its intracellular
involvement
into enzyme catalysis, protein structure, protein-protein interactions,
and protein oligo-nucleotide interactions (109-111). The accumulation
of Zn in the cell is a sum of influx and efflux processes via
transporter
proteins (112), like the four Zn transporters (ZnT1 – ZnT4), the
divalent
cation transporter 1 (DCT1) and of storage processes mainly bound to
metallothionein
(MT) (113). To study the effect of Zn deficiency on mRNA expression
levels
adult rats were used as an animal model. Feed intake was restricted to
8 g/d containing 2 µg Zn/g fortified with pure phytate in Zn
deficiency
rats (114) and 58 µg Zn/g in controls (n=7). At day 1, 2, 4, 7,
11, 16, 22, and 29 of Zn deficiency, 3 animals each were euthanised (n
= 24). Zn deficiency was evident from reduced plasma Zn, plasma
alkaline phosphatase activity and severe mobilization of Zn from tissue
stores (mainly skeleton), while feed intake and body weight remained
unaffected. Tissues representing Zn absorption (jejunum, colon), Zn
storage and utilization
(muscle, liver), and Zn excretion (kidney) were retrieved. Real-time
reverse
transcription (RT) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays were
developed
and a relative quantification on the basis of GAPDH mRNA expression was
applied. Assays allowed a relative and accurate quantification of mRNA
molecules
with a sufficiently high sensitivity and repeatability. All known Zn
transporter
subtypes were found to be expressed in the tissues. Expression patterns
and reactions to Zn deficiency were specific for the tissue analysed.
Expression
results imply that some transporters are expressed constitutively,
whereas
others are highly regulated in tissues responsible for Zn homeostasis.
The most distinct changes of expression levels were shown in colon
which
can therefore be postulated as a highly Zn sensitive tissue. MT was
down-regulated
in all tissues, in parallel with intracellular Zn status, and is
therefore
a potent candidate gene for Zn deficiency.
This study provides the first comparative view of gene
expression regulation and fully quantitative expression analysis of all
known Zn transporters in a non-growing adult rat model. In view of the
data provided the developed RT-PCR assay developed herein allows a
relative and accurate quantification of Zn transporters and MT mRNA
molecules with a sufficiently high sensitivity even for tissues with
low mRNA abundance. The expression results indicate the existence of Zn
transporter subtypes in various rat tissues, their different expression
pattern and their tissue specific regulation under Zn deficiency
treatment. The results show that all transporters and
MT have unique expression patterns (figure 8). Colon is a very Zn
sensitive tissue in view to the expression results. Expression results
imply that some transporters are expressed constitutively, whereas
others are highly regulated in tissues responsible for Zn homeostasis.
In all tissues MT expression level reflects the intracellular Zn status
best. In comparison to control group MT mRNA was down-regulated in all
tissues. MT subtype 1 and 2 mRNA expression is a potent candidate as a
marker gene for Zn deficiency (107).
Figure 8: Relative metallothionein (MT) expression
on the basis of GAPDH expression (= 1.00). The exponential relationship
in liver and colon of zinc deficiency and MT mRNA expression is
illustrated by the linear regression mean values (n = 3/7) on
logarithmic scale. (r = Pearson correlation coefficient;
p-value of correlation) (107).
From the
same experimental setup (107, 114) of Zn deficiency rats, a microarray
screening of 1001 genes (PIQORTM array) was performed in liver and
jejunum,
in collaboration with MEMOREC Stoffel GmbH (medical molecular research
cologne, Köln, Germany). The PIQORTM system allows the parallel
identification and quantification of thousands of genes from two
different
samples (e.g. diseased versus normal tissue or samples of
physiologically
treated animals versus treated animals) (7-9). For verification of
candidate genes found in array experiments, quantitative reverse
transcription - polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on a real-time
platform represents a suitable tool (21, 22, 115). Thus during the
recent years, real-time RT-PCR using SYBR Green I technology is more
and more used to quantify physiologically changes in gene expression
(3, 4) and to verify gene expression results derived from microarrays
(21, 22, 115).
The effect of zinc deficiency on a mRNA expression levels in
liver and jejunum
of adult rats was analysed. After experimental Zn deficiency, jejunum
and liver were retrieved and total RNA was extracted. Tissue specific
expression pattern were quantified by microarray analysis and verified
via real-time RT-PCR. A relative quantification was performed with the
newly developed Relative Expression Software Tool© (100) on 35
candidate
genes which showed a highly differential expression. RNAs from liver
and jejunum of control samples were reverse transcribed and Cy3 (green
fluorescence) labelled, RNAs from Zn deficiency samples were reverse
transcribed
and Cy5 (red fluorescence) labelled. A false colour overlay from the
hybridisation of liver samples on a PIQORTM array is shown. The spots
of the strongest down-regulated genes metallothionein subtype 1 and 2
(MT-1 and MT-2)
as well as up-regulated gene interleukins receptor type 6 beta
(IL-6R-beta) are indicated in figure 9.
Figure 9: Representative example of a gene
expression pattern captured as an image of a cDNA-array hybridised with
Cy3-labelled control sample (green fluorescence) and Cy5-labelled
sample (Zn deficiency in red fluorescence). Each of the 1001 cDNAs is
spotted either in quadrant A and B. Four replicates for
each cDNAs are spotted, resulting in four A and B quadrants,
respectively.
A magnification for the most up-regulated (MT-1 and MT-2) and
down-regulated (IL-6R-beta) gene transcripts is shown.
From the
1001 genes present on the microarray 457 genes in liver and 566 genes
in jejunum were found to be expressed with signal intensities in at
least one of the two channels for Cy3 or Cy5 greater than two-fold
above negative controls. Genes were combined in classes (0.1-fold
expression width), between 1-fold and 2-fold expression ratio and over
2-fold expression in wider ranges. A three parametric Gaussian
regression was calculated for each tissue (figure 10) on the bases of a
logarithmical conversion (10 log) of the median expression ratios of
each class. This resulted in high regression coefficient (rliver =
0.854, p < 0.0001; rjejunum = 0.853, p < 0.0001) and in a normal
distribution of both frequency datasets. A 95% confidential interval
was calculated for the x-fold expression ratio (x), two sided from the
mean (µ) according to the Gaussian distribution ( µ - 1.96
x standard deviation < µ < µ + 1.96 x standard
deviation ) and the two sided 2.5% significance level borders were
defined (p < 0.05). For liver and jejunum the following 95%
confidence intervals were calculated: -1.82-fold < x <
+1.74-fold, -1.71-fold < x < +1.61-fold,
respectively. According to the derived cut offs 85 candidate genes were
selected in total (figure 10). In liver
10 genes were up-regulated higher than 1.74-fold. The mean variation
of the calculated expression ratio was 6.3%, calculated from the signal
ratios of 4 cDNA spots per array experiment. In liver 23 genes were
down-regulated more than 1.82-fold with a variation of 8.6%. In jejunum
25 genes were up-regulated higher than 1.61-fold under zinc deficiency
(variation = 4.9%), and 27 genes were down-regulated 1.71-fold with an
average variation of 7.1%.
Figure 10: Frequency and level of down- or
up-regulation of regulated genes of microarray experiments in liver and
jejunum of Zn deficiency rats. Frequency plot of both tissue expression
pattern exhibit a three parametric Gaussian distribution (p
<0.0001). Mean (µ) and boarders of confidential interval are
indicated (µ ± 1.96 times the standard deviation of the
Gaussian distribution). Significantly different expressed genes
(p<0.05) were selected outside the 95% confidential interval. Lines
indicate an approximation of 95% interval in liver and jejunum.
The expression results indicate the existence of individual
expression pattern in
liver and jejunum and their tissue specific regulation under Zn
deficiency. In addition, in jejunum a number of B-cell related genes
could be demonstrated to be suppressed at Zn deficiency. In liver, MT-1
and MT-2 genes could be shown to be dramatically repressed and
therefore represent putative markers for Zn deficiency. Expression
results imply that some genes are expressed constitutively, whereas
others are highly regulated in tissues responsible for Zn homeostasis.
The combination of microarray analysis
and RT-PCR allowed a high effective screening over 1001 genes and
afterwards a high quantitative relative quantification of mRNA
molecules with high
sensitivity and reproducibility.
Data achieved demonstrate that the combination of microarray
and real time RT-PCR experiments represents a powerful approach, that
summarizes the advantages of both quantification systems - high
throughput of the microarray and sensitivity of the real-time RT-PCR.
The results demonstrate the feasibility and utility of both
methodologies to genome wide exploration of gene expression
patterns. But, normalisation in array experiments as well as in kinetic
RT-PCR is a general problem and needs high input of further
improvements
of new concepts, to gain more comparability and reliability in gene
expression analysis (21, 22, 115). The expression results indicate the
existence
of individual expression pattern in liver and jejunum and their tissue
specific regulation under Zn deficiency. Jejunum represents a very Zn
sensitive tissue with regard to the expression results of immunological
relevant genes. Our results imply that some genes are expressed
constitutively, whereas others are highly regulated in tissues
responsible for Zn homeostasis. Finally, MT subtype 1 and 2 represent
potent candidate genes as markers for Zn deficiency.
Real-time assays using SYBR Green I can easily reveal the
presence of primer dimers, which are the product of non-specific
annealing and primer elongation events (73). These events take place as
soon as PCR reagents are combined. During PCR, formation of primer
dimers competes with formation of specific PCR product, leading to
reduced amplification efficiency and a less successful specific RT-PCR
product (116). To distinguish primer dimers from the specific
amplicon a melting curve analysis can be performed in numerous
available
quantification software, shown in figure 11 for the LightCycler
platform
(81, 82). The pure and homogeneous RT-PCR product produce a single,
sharply
defined melting curve with a narrow peak (60).
In contrast, the primer dimers melt at relatively low
temperatures and have broader peaks, at 80°C (117). To avoid primer
dimer formation an intensive primer optimisation is needed, by testing
multiple primer pair by cross-wise combinations
(71, 118). Multiple optimisation strategies have been developed and are
published (60, 119-122). The easiest and most affective way to get rid
of any dimer structures, at least during the quantification procedure,
is to add an additional 4th segment to the classical three segmented
PCR procedure:
1st segment
with denaturation at 95°C;
Figure 11: Melting curves of insulin like growth
factor-1 (IGF-1) real-time RT-PCR products from multiple species.
Melting temperatures of IGF-1 products are between 88.7°C
(Callithrix jacchus), 87.7°C (Sus scrofa), 89.9°C (Ovis aries),
90.5°C (Bos taurus) and for primer-dimers are lower than 82°C.
The 4th segment during the amplification program melts the unspecific
LightCycler PCR products at 85°C and eliminates any non-specific
fluorescence signals (51). Callithrix jacchus samples were kindly
donated by R Einspanier and A. Einspanier in collaboration with
the German Primate Center in Göttingen.
The advantages of a high temperature fluorescence acquisition during amplification are a more reliable quantification with less variation in a wider quantification range (60, 72, 83). The fluorescence acquisition in 4th segment is performed mainly in the range of 80-87°C, eliminates the non-specific fluorescence signals derived by primer dimers or unspecific minor products and ensures accurate quantification of the desired product. High temperature quantification keeps the background fluorescence and the „no template control“ fluorescence under 2-3% of maximal fluorescence at plateau (58, 60, 72). Especially in SYBR ® Green I determination sensitive transcript quantification with high linearity (correlation coefficient r = 0.99) over eight orders of magnitude (102 to 109 RNA start molecules) can be achieved (figure 12 B). In contrast, a conventional determination at 72°C results in a truncated quantification range (r = 0.99) over only four orders of magnitude (105 to 109 RNA start molecules, figure 12 A).
Figure 12: The effect of fluorescence acquisition in
4th segment at elevated temperatures (60). SYBR ® Green I
acquisition at 72°C in the 3rd segment (figure 12 A, upper graph)
and 85°C in the 4th segment (figure 12 B, lower graph) from
101 to 109 recRNA start molecules and one “negative control”. Both
online quantifications were done in one and the same
LightCycler experiment within the same capillaries.
Individual samples generate
different and individual fluorescence histories in kinetic RT-PCR. The
shapes
of amplification curves differ in the steepness of any fluorescence
increase
and in the absolute fluorescence levels at plateau depending on
background fluorescence levels. The PCR efficiency has a major impact
on the fluorescence history and the accuracy of the calculated
expression result and is critically influenced by PCR reaction
components. Efficiency evaluation is an essential marker in gene
quantification procedure (59, 63, 64, 123-125). Constant
amplification efficiency in all samples compared is one important
criterion
for reliable comparison between samples. This becomes crucially
important
when analysing the relationship between an unknown sequence versus a
standard
sequence, which is performed in all relative quantification models. In
experimental
designs employing standardisation with housekeeping genes, the demand
for
invariable amplification efficiency between target and standard is
often
ignored, despite the fact that corrections have been suggested (99,
100,
124, 125). A correction for efficiency, as performed in efficiency
corrected
mathematical models (equation 3-6), is strongly recommended and results
in
a more reliable estimation of the „real expression ratio“ compared to
no
efficiency correction. Small efficiency differences between target and
reference
gene generate false expression ratio, resulting in over- or
under-estimation
of the „real“ initial mRNA amount. Difference in PCR efficiency (DE) of
3%
(DE = 0.03) between target gene and reference gene generate falsely
calculated
differences in expression of 47% in case of Etarget < Eref and 209%
in
case of Etarget > Eref after 25 performed cycles. This gap will
increase
dramatically by higher efficiency differences DE = 0.05 (28% and 338%,
respectively)
and DE = 0.10 (7.2% and 1083%, respectively) and higher cycle number
performed
(62, 100). Therefore efficiency corrected quantification corrections
should be included in the automation and calculation procedure in
relative quantification models (59). The assessment of the exact
amplification efficiencies of target
and reference genes must be carried out before any calculation of the
normalized gene expression is done. LightCycler Relative Expression
Software (72, 77), Q-Gene (91), REST and REST-XL software applications
(99, 100) allow the
evaluation of amplification efficiency plots. A separate determination
of
real-time PCR efficiency in triplets for every tissue and each
performed
transcript is necessary (82, 99, 100, 102). Different tissues exhibit
different
PCR efficiencies, caused by RT inhibitors, PCR inhibitors and by
variations
in the total RNA fraction pattern extracted (64).
Several methods are described in the literature or were
developed by Pfaffl et al. (59, 60, 63, 64) to calculate real-time PCR
efficiency (http://www.wzw.tum.de/gene-quantification/efficiency.html):
A) Real-time PCR efficiency calculation from the slopes of
the calibration curve, according to
the equation: E = 10 [–1/slope], as shown in figure 13 (14, 62, 76).
Determination of efficiency should be evaluated in a pool of all
starting
RNA to accumulate all possible „negative impacts“ on kinetic PCR
efficiency.
Usually, real-time PCR efficiency vary with high linearity (r >
0.989)
from E = 1.60 to maximal values up to E = 2.10 for cDNA input ranges
from
a few pg to 75 ng cDNA input. Typically, the relationship between CP
and the logarithm of the starting copy number of the target sequence
should remain linear for up to five orders of magnitude in the
calibration curve as well as in the native sample RNA (4, 72, 99). This
calculation method results, in some cases, in efficiencies higher than
(E > 2.0), which is practically impossible in the PCR amplification
theory. But as shown in given results they are highly reproducible and
constant within one transcript
and tissue. This probably indicates that this efficiency calculation
method
is not optimal and overestimates the „real efficiency“.
Figure 13: Determination of real-time PCR efficiencies from the slopes of the calibration curve (method A), according to the equation: E = 10 [–1/slope] (5, 53, 65) of “reference gene” glutathione transferase (Gst), and two “target genes”: tryptophan operon (TyrA) and aspartate transcarbamylase (PyrB) (99). CP cycles versus cDNA (reverse transcribed total RNA) concentration input (log scale) were plotted to calculate the slope (mean ± SD; n = 3). B) Efficiency calculation from the fluorescence increase in
3rd linear phase (as shown in figure 2) of each logarithmic
fluorescence history plot. The investigator has to decide which cycle
number to include in the analysis and plot
an linear regression (similarly to the “Fit Point Method” regression),
where the slope of the regression line represents the PCR efficiency.
Here efficiencies between E = 1.35 and E = 1.60 are realistic and
differ dramatically
from the results above (60, 58, 126). This efficiency calculation
method
might underestimate the „real efficiency“, because data evaluation is
made in linear phase near the plateau, where reaction trends to get
restrictive (58).
C) Efficiency calculation on the basis of all fluorescence
data points (starting at cycle 1st up to the last cycle), according to
a sigmoidal or logistic curve fit
model. The advantage of such model is that all data points will be
included
in the calculation process. No background subtraction is necessary (59,
63, 64, 123-125). Slope value is „nearly“ identical to method B and
only
measured at the point of inflexion at absolute maximum fluorescence
increase
of “first derivate maximum” (FDM) (1.35 < E < 1.60). But the
derived slope parameters generated by the full sigmoidal or full
logistic (figure 14) models are not directly comparable with the „real
PCR efficiency“. This method is easy to perform and a good estimator
for the maximum curve slope with high correlation coefficient (r >
0.99) and level of significance (p < 0.001) (59, 63, 64).
D) Efficiency calculation from the fluorescence increase
only in the 2nd real exponential phase, according to a polynomial curve
fit, as described earlier Yn = Y0 (E)n , where Yn is fluorescence
acquired at cycle n, and Y0 initial fluorescence, so called ground
fluorescence (59, 126-128). This phase around the “Second Derivate
Maximum” (SDM) exhibit a real exponential amplification behaviour (59)
(figure 14). Here in the exponential part the PCR reaction kinetic is
still under „full power“ with no restrictions (62, 63, 64, 82). In
this method the calculation is performed on each reaction kinetic plot
and the amplification efficiency can be determined exactly. They range
from E = 1.75 to E = 1.90, hence are between the other methods.
Figure 14: Plot of fluorescence observations from
LightCycler (Roche Diagnostics). Forty observations give a sigmoid
trajectory that can be described by full
data fit (four-parametric logistic model). Ground phase can be well
linearly regressed. FDM and SDM denote position of first and second
derivative maximum within full data fit.
Which efficiency calculation method (estimation A to D) is
„the correct one“ and which one shows the realistic real-time PCR
kinetic and thereby is highly reproducible has to be evaluated in
further trials.
Data normalisation in
real-time RT-PCR is a further major step in gene quantification
analysis (3,
42, 99, 100, 129). The reliability of any relative RT-PCR experiment
can
be improved by including an invariant endogenous control in the assay
to
correct for sample to sample variations in RT-PCR efficiency and errors
in
sample quantification. A biologically meaningful reporting of target
mRNA copy numbers requires accurate and relevant normalisation to some
standard and is strongly recommended in kinetic RT-PCR. But the quality
of normalized quantitative expression data cannot be better than the
quality of
the normalizer itself. Any variation in the normalizer will obscure
real changes and produce artifactual changes (3, 41, 42). Real-time
RT-PCR-specific errors in the quantification of mRNA transcripts are
easily compounded with any variation in the amount of starting material
between the samples, e.g. caused by sample-to-sample variation,
variation
in RNA integrity, RT efficiency differences and cDNA sample loading
variation
(26, 27, 42, 99). This is especially relevant when the samples have
been
obtained from different individuals, different tissues and different
time
courses, and will result in the misinterpretation of the derived
expression
profile of the target genes. Therefore, normalisation of target gene
expression
levels must be performed to compensate intra- and inter-kinetic RT-PCR
variations (sample-to-sample and run-to-run variations).
Data normalisation can be carried out against an endogenous
unregulated reference gene
transcript or against total cellular DNA or RNA content (molecules/g
total DNA/RNA and concentrations/g total DNA/RNA). Normalisation
according
the total cellular RNA content is increasingly used, but little is
known
about the total RNA content of cells or even about the mRNA
concentrations. The content per cell or per gram tissue may vary in
different tissues
in vivo, in cell culture (in vitro), between individuals and under
different experimental conditions. Nevertheless, it has been shown that
normalisation to total cellular RNA is the least unreliable method (3,
42, 86, 87). It requires an accurate quantification of the isolated
total RNA or
mRNA fraction by optical density at 260 nm (43), Agilent Bioanalyser
2100,
or Ribogreen RNA Quantification Kit. Alternatively the rRNA content has
been proposed as an optimal and stable basis for normalisation, despite
reservations concerning its expression levels, transcription by a
different
RNA polymerase and possible imbalances in rRNA and mRNA fractions
between
different samples (42, 55, 103, 130-132).
To normalize the absolute quantification according to a
single reference gene,
a second set of kinetic PCR reactions has to be performed for the
invariant endogenous control on all experimental samples and the
relative abundance values are calculated for internal control as well
as for the target gene. For each target gene sample, the relative
abundance value obtained is divided by the value derived from the
control sequence in the corresponding target gene. The normalized
values for different samples can then
directly be compared.
The objective of the following study, in collaboration with
D. Schams and B. Berisha, was to demonstrate the mRNA expression of
estrogen receptor ? (ER?), ERß and progesterone receptor (PR) in
bovine ovarian follicles and in corpus luteum during estrous cycle and
pregnancy (87). To quantify steroid receptor transcripts, sensitive and
reliable real-time RT-PCR absolute quantification methods were
developed. Expression results were normalised on the basis of GAPDH
mRNA expression, which was constant over the experimental trial
(estrous cycle and pregnancy).
The investigated ovarian steroid hormones estrogen and
progesterone fulfil a number
of important functions related to reproduction by endocrine mechanisms
of action. In addition to acting as hormones on structures remote from
the ovary, the steroids produced by follicle or corpus luteum cells
also
act locally within the follicles or corpora lutea in which they are
produced as paracrine/autocrine agents, acting on or within the cells
in which
they are produced. The main ovarian events studied for steroid
involvement
have been folliculogenesis, steroidogenesis, ovulation, corpus luteum
formation and function. Estradiol-17ß is a most active estrogen
in the ovary, and is synthesized and secreted by granulosa cells in
antral
follicles, especially pre-ovulatory dominant follicles and in corpus
luteum.
The mRNA
expression of ER? and ER? mRNA in theca interna tissue (TI) (lower
pg/µg RNA) increased continuously and significantly during final
growth of follicles, with much higher levels for ER?. The mRNA
expression
of ERa and ERb in granulosa cells (GC) (fg/µg RNA) increased
continuously during follicle growth (see figures 15 A, B, C).
The expression of mRNA for PR in follicles (lower
fg/µg RNA) increased continuously to maximum level in
pre-ovulatory follicles with a significant change only in TI. The
highest mRNA expression for ER? (fg/µg RNA) was detected in
corpus luteum (CL) during the early luteal phase, following by a
significant decrease of expression during the mid, late, and regression
phases. In contrast, ER? mRNA expression is relatively high during the
early stage, decreased during the late early and mid luteal phase, and
increased significantly again during the late luteal phase and after CL
regression. During pregnancy, low levels of ER? and ER? mRNA expression
(<25 fg/µg RNA) with no significant changes were measured. No
significant
alterations in PR mRNA expression (levels <13 fg/µg RNA)
during
the estrous cycle and pregnancy in bovine CL was found. The results
suggest
an autocrine and/or paracrine role of steroid receptors in the
regulation
of final follicle growth and corpus luteum formation and function (87).
Figure 15: Tissue-specific ER?, ER?, and PR mRNA
expression (LightCycler real-time RT-PCR) in
different bovine follicle classes, according to estradiol
concentrations
in follicle fluid (73): (15 A) ER? in theca interna (TI) cells (p)
and ER? in TI (£); (15 B) ER? in granulosa cells (GC) (¨)
and ER? in GC (£); (15 C) PR in TI (o) and PR in GC (n). Results
(concentration of mRNA/µg total RNA) represent means ± SEM
from 4–5 follicles/class. Different superscript letters indicate
significant
differences between groups (p < 0.05).
Here a central
questions arise: “What is the appropriate reference gene for an
experimental treatment and investigated tissue ?” (3, 42, 133).
Commonly
used housekeeping genes, e.g. GAPDH, albumin, actins, tubulins,
cyclophilin, microglobulins, 18S rRNA or 28S rRNA (40, 52-54) may be
suitable for reference genes, since they are present in all nucleated
cell types and are necessary for basic cell survival. The mRNA
synthesis of housekeeping genes is considered to be stable in various
tissues, even under experimental treatments. However, numerous
treatments and studies have already shown that above mentioned
housekeeping genes are regulated and vary under experimental conditions
(103-106, 134). It remains up to the individual investigator to choose
a reference gene that is best for reliable normalisation in their
particular experimental setting. In addition, the endogenous control
should be expressed at roughly the same CP level as the target gene (3,
40, 42, 62). At the same CP level, reference and target experience the
same condition and real-time RT-PCR kinetics with respect to polymerase
activation (heat activation of polymerase), reaction inactivation,
stochastic relation between target and primer concentration, and
reaction end product inhibition by the generated RT-PCR product.
It has to be emphasized again, that the choice of
housekeeping or lineage specific genes is critical. For a number of
commonly used reference genes processed pseudogenes have been shown to
exist, e.g. b-actin or GAPDH (31-37)
. These pseudogenes may be responsible for specific amplification
products in an mRNA-independent fashion and result in specific
amplification
even in the absence of intact mRNA (31-33, 91). It is vital to develop
universal, artificial, stable, internal standard materials that can be
added prior to the RNA preparation to monitor the efficiency of RT as
well as the kinetic PCR, respectively (3, 42). Usually more than one
housekeeping
gene should be tested in a multiple correlation analysis and its
behaviour
summarized to a housekeeping gene index called BestKeeper©
(software
tool and publication for Nucleic Acids Research is in preparation).
According
to this BestKeeper© index, which is based on the weighted
expression of at least three housekeeping genes, a more reliable basis
of normalisation in relative quantification can be postulated.
The weighted index (using 18S, ubiquitin, GAPDH and
beta-actin as housekeeping
genes) was calculated for normalisation in three studies, together
with R. Bruckmaier, T. Inderwies, T. Neuvians and M. Reist (University
of Berne). Subject of the first study was the detection and
quantification
of mRNA expression of a- and b-adrenergic receptor subtypes in the
bovine
mammary gland of dairy cows (118). Herein two new subtypes were
elucidated
in cattle, the b-adrenergic receptor subtype 1B and 2C.
In the second collaborative study together with the
University of Berne further nine 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor subtypes
were elucidated in cattle intestinal tract (135). Serotonin
(5?Hydroxytryptamine) is involved in a wide range of physiological
functions and pathological states in humans. There
is evidence that serotonergic pathways are also involved in
gastrointestinal (GI) motility disorders in ruminants such as abomasal
displacement or cecal dilatation/dislocation. This study aimed to
develop and validate real-time PCR assays for quantitative mRNA
analysis of 5?HT receptor subtypes in bovine tissues. Because the
bovine 5?HT receptor nucleotide sequences were completely unknown
before in cattle, multiple species (human, mouse, and rat) comparisons
of nucleotide sequences were done and primers used for bovine cDNA
amplification were derived from human or mouse sequences in highly
homologous regions (135).
In the third study, in cooperation with T. Neuvians and D.
Schams (136), a normalisation was applied on the weighted housekeeping
genes index using 18S, ubiquitin, GAPDH and beta-actin. There a new
isoforms of the bovine insulin receptor in the corpus luteum was
elucidated in quantitative studies. All newly elucidated sequences
(summarised in the appendix) were published in the sequences databases
EMBL (European Molecular Biology Library; http://www.ebi.ac.uk/) and GenBank (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
Entrez/index.html).
Today there is increasing appreciation of a more reliable
normalisation in relative quantification. Recently the software tool
GeNorm was established for the evaluation of housekeeping genes
expression levels (40). GeNorm allows for an accurate normalisation of
real-time quantitative RT-PCR data by geometric averaging of multiple
internal control genes (http://allserv.rug.ac.be/
~jvdesomp/genorm/). The GeNorm VBA applet for Microsoft Excel
determines the most stable housekeeping genes from a set of 10 tested
genes in a given cDNA sample panel, and calculates a gene expression
normalisation factor for each tissue sample based on the geometric mean
of a user defined number of housekeeping genes. The normalisation
strategy
used in GeNorm is a prerequisite for accurate kinetic RT-PCR expression
profiling, which opens up the possibility of studying the biological
relevance of small expression differences (40).
Data evaluation The next step in reliable gene quantification using
real-time RT-PCR is the data evaluation.
The calculation unit in real-time PCR is a sample specific and
characteristic crossing points (CP). For CP determination various
fluorescence acquisition methodologies are possible. The “Fit Point
Method” and “Threshold Cycle Method” measure the CP at a constant
fluorescence level (76, 81). These constant threshold methods assume
that all samples have the same cDNA
concentration at the point were the fluorescence signal significantly
increases in 2nd to 3rd phase over the background fluorescence (figure
2). Measuring the level of background fluorescence can be a challenge
in real-time PCR reactions with significant background fluorescence
variations,
caused by drift-ups and drift-downs over the course of the reaction.
Averaging over a drifting background will give an overestimation of
variance
and thus increase the threshold level (62, 76, 82). The threshold level
can be calculated by fitting the intersecting line upon the ten-times
value
of ground fluorescence standard deviation. This acquisition mode can be
easily automated and is very robust (76). In the “Fit Point Method” the
user discards the uninformative background points, excludes the plateau
values by entering the number of log-linear points, and then fits a
log-line
to the linear portion of the amplification curves. These log lines are
extrapolated back to a common threshold line and the intersection of
the
two lines provides the CP value. The strength of this method is its
extreme
robustness. The weakness is that it can not be easily automated and
requires
a lot of user input (62, 81). “Fit Point Method” or “Threshold Cycle
Method”
can be used on all available platforms with different evaluation of
background
variability.
The problems of defining a constant background for all
samples within one run, sample-to-sample differences in variance and
absolute fluorescence values lead to develop a new acquisition modus
according to mathematical algorithms. In the
LightCycler software the “Second Derivative Maximum Method” is
performed,
where CP is automatically identified and measured at the maximum
acceleration
of fluorescence (62, 81). The kinetic fluorescence histories of
individual curves are different. They show individual background
variability (1st
phase), exponential and linear growth of fluorescence (2nd and 3rd
phase),
and finally reaction specific plateau values (4th phase), as shown in
figure 2. The amplification reaction and the kinetic fluorescence
history
over various cycles is obviously not a smooth and easy function. The
mathematical
algorithm on which the “Second Derivative Maximum Method” in Roche
Molecular
Biochemicals software (82) is based is unpublished. But it is possible
to fit sigmoidal- and polynomial-curve models, with high significance
(p<0.001) and coefficient of correlation (r>0.99), which can be
differentiated and the 2nd derivate maximum can be estimated (59, 63,
64, 124, 125). This increase in the rate of fluorescence increase, or
better called the acceleration of the fluorescence signal, slows down
at
the beginning of the 3rd linear phase. Therefore the cycle where the
2nd
derivative is at its maximum is always between 2nd exponential and 3rd
linear
phase (59).
Automation of quantification with any kind of calibration
curve using “Fit Point Method”, “Threshold Cycle Method” or “Second
Derivative Maximum Method” needs the input
of individual settings, e.g. threshold level, noise band, import an
existing standard curve, and the corresponding concentration of the
used
standard material. However, although relative expression is performed
according to several established mathematical models (equations 1-6),
up
to now relative quantification software has been commercially available
only from Roche Molecular Biochemicals “LightCycler Relative
Quantification
Software” (http://www.LightCycler-online.com/lc_sys/
soft_ind.htm#quant). The software allows a comparison of maximal
triplets (n = 3), of a target versus a calibrator gene, both corrected
via a reference gene expression and calculates on the basis of the
median of the performed triplets. Real-time PCR efficiency correction
is possible within the software and calculated from the calibration
curve slope, according to the established equation (62) E = 10
[–1/slope],
ranging from E = 1.0 (minimum value) to E = 2.0 (theoretical maximum
and
efficiency optimum). As shown in equation 6 a given correction factor
(CF) and a multiplication factor (MF) have to be attended in the
equation
calculation process (82).
Recently
it was not possible to perform a reliable group-wise calculation of
the relative expression ratios and a subsequent statistical comparison
of the results by a statistical test with more than three repeats or
more than three samples. This has changed with the development of new
software tools were established, REST and REST-XL, both
Excel®-based
and programmed in Visual Basic for Applications (99, 100). Both compare
two treatment groups, with multiple data points in sample group versus
control group, and calculates the relative expression ratio between
them.
Four target genes with up to 100 data points can be calculated in
REST-XL.
The mathematical model used is based on the MEAN crossing point
deviation
between sample and control group of up to four target genes, normalized
by the MEAN crossing point deviation of a reference gene (equation 4).
Normalisation via endogenous control can be performed according to the
users demand,
but it is recommended to compensate intra- and inter-RT-PCR variations
(130). Therefore the requirement for high reproducibility of RT and RT
efficiency is not „that important“ any more. The cDNA input
concentration
variation up to ± 3-fold was evaluated to mimic these huge RT
variations
and resulted in no significant changes of relative expression ratio
(99,
100). Specific amplification efficiencies of four target gene genes can
be estimated and included in the correction of the quantification
ratio.
If no real-time PCR efficiency assessment is performed, REST assumes an
optimal efficiency of E = 2.0. The main advantage of the software tool
is the subsequent statistical test. REST tests the group differences
for significance with a newly developed randomisation test - Pair Wise
Fixed Reallocation Randomisation Test©. Variation depends only on
CP variation of the investigated transcripts and remains stable between
3% and 12%.
Nevertheless,
successful application of real-time RT-PCR and REST depends on a clear
understanding of the practical problems. Therefore a coherent
experimental design, application and validation of the individual
real-time RT-PCR assay remains essential for accurate and fully
quantitative measurement of mRNA transcripts
(http://www.wzw.tum.de/gene-quantification/rest.html).
Recently
a second software tool, named Q-Gene, was developed (102). Q-Gene
manages and expedites the planning, performance, and evaluation of
quantitative real-time PCR experiments, as well as the mathematical and
statistical analysis, storage, and graphical presentation of the data.
An efficiency correction is possible. The Q-Gene software application
is a tool to
cope with complex quantitative real-time PCR experiments at a
high-throughput scale (96-well and 384-well format) and considerably
expedites and rationalizes the experimental setup, data analysis, and
data management while ensuring highest reproducibility
(http://www.biotechniques.com/softlib/qgene.html).
Bio-informatics and bio-statistics on real-time RT-PCR
experiment data is a new subject and a new challenge in gene
quantification analysis. This is because the
coordination of the experiments and the efficient management of the
collected data has become an additional major hurdle for kinetic RT-PCR
experiments. The main challenge remains the evaluation and the
mathematical
and statistical analysis of the enormous amount of data gained by this
technology, as these functions are not included in the software
provided
by the manufacturers of the detection systems (76, 81). Normally the
statistical data analysis in gene quantification, independent of block,
competitive or real-time RT-PCR experiments, are all performed on the
basis of classical standard parametric tests, such as analysis of
variance
or t-tests (137). Parametric tests depend on assumptions, such as
normality
of distributions, whose validity is unclear. In absolute or relative
quantification
analysis, where the quantities of interest are derived from ratios and
variances
can be high, normal distributions might not be expected, and it is
unclear
how a parametric test could best be constructed (100).
Only two
free available software packages support statistical analysis of
expression results: Q-Gene (102) and REST (100). The Q-Gene Statistics
Add-In is a collection of several VBA programs for the rapid and
menu-guided performance of frequently used parametric and nonparametric
statistical tests. To assess the significance level difference between
any two groups expression values, it is possible to perform a paired or
an unpaired Student’s
test, a Mann-Whitney U-test, or Wilcoxon signed-rank test (137). In
addition, the Pearson’s correlation analysis can be applied between
two matched groups of expression values. Furthermore, all statistical
programs calculate the mean values of both groups analysed and their
difference in percent. Permutation or randomisation tests are a useful alternative
to more standard parametric tests for analysing experimental data (138,
139). They have the advantage of making no distributional assumptions
about the data, while remaining as powerful as more standard tests, and
is instead based on one we
know to be true: that treatments were randomly allocated (138). The
randomisation test is conducted as follows: A statistical test is based
on the probability of an effect as large as that observed occurring
under the null hypothesis of no treatment effect. If this hypothesis
is true, the values in one treatment group were just as likely to have
occurred in the other group. The randomisation test repeatedly and
randomly
reallocates the observed values to the two groups, and notes the
apparent
effect (expression ratio in REST) each time. The proportion of these
effects which are as great as that actually observed in the experiment
gives us the p-value of the test
(http://www.bioss.ac.uk/smart/unix/mrandt/slides/frames.htm).
The REST
software package makes full use of the advantages of a randomisation
test (100). In the applied two sided Pair Wise Fixed Reallocation
Randomisation Test for each sample, the CP values for reference and
target genes are jointly reallocated to control and sample groups (=
pair wise fixed reallocation), and the expression ratios are calculated
on the basis of the mean values. In practice, it is impractical to
examine all possible allocations
of data to treatment groups, and a random sample is drawn. If 2000 or
more samples are taken, a good estimate of p-value (standard error <
0.005 at p = 0.05) will be obtained (138, 139). Randomisation tests
with
a pair wise reallocation are seen as the most appropriate approach for
this type of application. They are more flexible than non-parametric
tests
based on ranks (Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis etc.) And do not suffer a
reduction in power relative to parametric tests (t-tests, ANOVA etc.).
They
can be slightly conservative (i.e. Type I error rates lower than the
stated
significance level) due to acceptance of randomisations with group
differences
identical to that observed, but this mainly occurs when used with
discrete
data, which gene expression data are not, and small sample sizes (138,
139).
The recent advances in gene quantification strategies, assay
optimisation, assay validation, fluorescence and data processing
developed at the Institute of Physiology in Weihenstephan have led to
the development of various assays whereby mRNA transcripts can be
quantified more precisely in very short time. Numerous gene expression
assays were established for a reliable mRNA quantification, including
37 newly elucidated genes mainly in Bos taurus and Ovis aries. The
benefits in terms of increased sensitivity, reduced variability,
reduced risk of contamination, increased throughput by automation, and
meaningful data interpretation are obvious. If done properly, kinetic
RT-PCR will
be the most powerful method for quantifying cellular mRNA on a few
molecule level. The quantification strategy used should be designed
according to
the demand, but must be highly optimised and precisely validated. In
the
future there is a need for greater standardization of the applied
assays
to make the expression results comparable between runs, between
real-time RT-PCR platforms and between different laboratories
worldwide.
The achieved innovations during the last years in gene
transcript quantification will help in future to understanding the
complex relation between genomics, transcriptomics, and physiology in
agricultural, veterinary and medical sciences.
I would like to express my acknowledgement of thanks to my
supervisor Prof. Dr. H. H. D. Meyer for initiation of this work and the
opportunity to work at the Institute of Physiology in Weihenstephan.
I am very grateful to
all my colleagues at the institute PD Dr. R. Bruckmaier, Prof. Dr. S.
Schams,
PD Dr. R. Einspanier, Dr. B. Berisha, Dr. A. Didier, Dr. A.
Daxenberger, Dr. I. G. Lange, Dr. S. Wittmann, Dr. M. Hageleit, Dt. T.
Neuvians, Dipl. Ing. agr. C. Prgomet, Dipl. Biol. A. Tichopad, Msc. A.
Dzidic, for encouraging my research in various ways.
I would like to thank D. Tetzlaff and A. Sachsenhauser for their technical assistance and all the other lab members for the good working atmosphere. Furthermore the author thanks all external persons for the
fruitful collaboration in various animal experiments, laboratory work
and intensive discussion over the recent years Prof. Dr. L. Dempfle,
Prof. Dr. J. Bauer (Department of Animal Science), Prof. Dr. W.
Windisch (University of Vienna), Prof. Dr. J. Blum, Dr. M. Reist, Dr.
T. Mircheva-Georgieva, Dr. H. Hammon (University of Berne), Prof. Dr.
H. Sauerwein (University of Bonn) and Dr. G. Horgan (BIOSS in
Scotland).
References
1.
Orlando, C., Pinzani, P., and Pazzagli, M., Developments in
quantitative PCR, Clin. Chem. Lab Med., 36:
255-269, 1998. 2.
Lockey, C., Otto E., and Long, Z., Real-time fluorescence
detection of a single DNA molecule. Biotechniques, 24: 744-746, 1998. 3.
Bustin, S.A., Absolute quantification of mRNA using
real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assays. J Mol
Endocrinol., 25: 169-193, 2000. 5.
Bustin, S.A., Dorudi S., The value of microarray
techniques for quantitative gene profiling in molecular diagnostics.
Trends Mol Med 8(6): 269-272, 2002. 6.
Harrington, C.A., Rosenow, C., and Retief, J., Monitoring
gene expression using DNA microarrays. Curr Opin Microbiol. 3(3),
285-291, 2000. 7.
Schena, M., Shalon, D., Davis, R.W., and Brown, P.O.,
Quantitative monitoring of gene expression patterns with a
complementary DNA microarray. Science. 270(5235), 368-371, 1995. 8.
DeRisi, J.L, and Iyer, V.R., (1999) Genomics and array
technology. Curr Opin Oncol. 11(1), 76-79. 9.
DeRisi, J.L., Iyer, V.R., and Brown P.O., Exploring the
metabolic and genetic control of gene expression on a genomic scale.
Science. 278(5338), 680-686, 1997. 11.
Pfaffl, M.W.;
Schwarz, F., and Sauerwein, H., Quantification of the insulin like
growth factor-1 (IGF-1) mRNA: Modulation of growth intensity by feeding
results in inter- and intra-tissue specific differences of IGF-1 mRNA
expression in steers.
Experimental and Clinical Endocrinology & Diabetes 106(6): 513-520,
1998. 14.
Higuchi, R., Fockler, C., Dollinger, G., and Watson, R.,
Kinetic PCR analysis: real-time monitoring of DNA amplification
reactions. Biotechnology, 11(9): 1026-1030, 1993. 15.
Heid, C. A., Stevens, J., Livak, K.J., and Williams,
P.M., Real time quantitative PCR, Genome Res., 6: 986-993, 1996. 16.
Gibson,
U.E., Heid, C.A,. And Williams,
P.M., A novel method for real time quantitative RT-PCR. Genome Res, 6:
1095-1001, 1996. 17.
Mackay, I. M., Arden, K. E., and Nitsche, A., Real-time
PCR in virology, Nucleic Acids Res., 30:
1292-1305, 2002. 18.
Wittwer, C.T., and Garling,
D.J., Rapid cycle DNA amplification: Time and temperature optimization.
Biotechniques, 10: 76-83, 1991. 19.
Freeman, W.M., Walker, S.J., and Vrana, K,E.,
Quantitative RT-PCR: pitfalls and potential. Biotechniques., 26(1):
112-125, 1999. 20.
Winer, J., Jung, C.K., Shacke,l I., and Williams, P.M.,
Development and validation of real-time quantitative reverse
transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction for monitoring gene
expression in cardiac myocytes in vitro. Anal Biochem., 270(1): 41-49,
1999. 21.
Rajeevan, M.S., Ranamukhaarachchi, D.G., Vernon, S.D.,
and Unger, E.R., Use of real-time quantitative PCR to validate the
results of cDNA array and differential display PCR technologies.
Methods. 25(4), 443-451, 2001. 22.
Rajeevan, M,S,, Vernon, S,D,, Taysavang, N, and Unger,
E,R, Validation of array-based gene expression profiles by real-time
(kinetic) RT-PCR. J Mol Diagn. 3(1), 36-31,
2001. 23.
Steuerwald, N., Cohen, J., Herrera, R.J., and Brenner
C.A., Analysis of gene expression in single oocytes and embryos by
real-time rapid cycle fluorescence monitored RT-PCR. Mol Hum Reprod.,
5: 1034-1039, 1999. 24.
Schmittgen, T.D., Zakrajsek, B.A., Mills, A.G., Gorn, V.,
Singer, M.J., and Reed, M.W., Quantitative reverse
transcription-polymerase chain reaction to study mRNA decay:
comparison of endpoint and real-time methods. Anal Biochem., 285(2):
194-204, 2000. 25.
Swift, G.H., Peyton, M.J., and macDonald, R.J.,
Assessment of RNA quality by semi-quantitative RT-PCR of multiple
regions of a long ubiquitous mRNA. Biotechniques., 28(3):
524-531, 2000. 26.
Mannhalter, C., Koizar, D.,
and Mitterbauer, G., Evaluation of RNA isolation methods and reference
genes
for RT-PCR analyses of rare target RNA. Clin Chem Lab Med, 38:
171-177, 2000. 27.
Freeman, T.C., Lee, K., and
Richardson, P.J., Analysis of gene expression in single cells. Curr
Opin
Biotechnol., 10(6): 579-582, 1999. 28.
Dixon, A.K., Richardson, P.J., Pinnock, R.D., and Lee,
K., Gene-expression analysis at the single-cell level. Trends Pharmacol
Sci., 21(2): 65-70, 2000. 31.
Moss, M., and Gallwitz, D.,
Structure of two human beta-actin related processed genes, one of which
is
located next to a simple repetitive sequence. EMBO, 2: 757–761, 1983. 32.
Mutimer, H., Deacon, N., Crowe, S., and Sonza, S.,
Pitfalls of processed pseudogenes in RT-PCR. Biotechniques., 24(4):
585-588, 1998. 33.
Neumaier, M., Gerhard, M., and Wagener, C., Diagnosis of
micrometastases by the amplification of tissue-specific genes. Gene.,
159(1): 43-47, 1995. 34.
Tschentscher, P., Wagener, C., and Neumaier, M.,
Sensitive and specific cytokeratin 18 reverse transcription-polymerase
chain reaction that excludes amplification of processed pseudogenes
from contaminating genomic DNA. Clin Chem., 43(12): 2244-2250, 1997. 35.
Dirnhofer, S., Berger, C., Untergasser, G., Geley, S.,
and Berger, P., Human beta-actin retro pseudogenes interfere with
RT-PCR. Trends Genet., 11(10): 380-381, 1995. 36.
Ercolani, L., Florence, B.,
Denaro, M., and Alexander, M., Isolation and complete sequence of a
functional
human glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase gene. J Biol Chem.,
263(30): 15335-15341, 1988. 37.
Garcia-Meunier, P., Etienne-Julan, M., Fort, P.,
Piechaczyk, M., and Bonhomme, F., Concerted evolution
in the GAPDH family of retrotransposed pseudogenes. Mamm Genome.,
4(12):
695-703, 1993. 38.
Watzinger, F., and Lion, T., Multiplex PCR for quality
control of template RNA/cDNA in RT-PCR assays. Leukemia, 12: 1983–1986,
1998. 39.
Burkardt, H.J., Standardization and quality control of
PCR analyses. Clin
Chem Lab Med., 38(2): 87-91, 2000. 40.
Vandesompele, J., De Preter, K., Pattyn, F., Poppe, B.,
Van Roy, N., De Paepe, A., and Speleman,
F., Accurate normalisation of real-time quantitative RT-PCR data by
geometric averaging of multiple internal control genes. Genome Biology,
3(7): 0034.1-0034.11, 2002. 41.
Bustin, S.A., Meaningful quantification of mRNA using
real-time RT-PCR. (submitted), 2002. 42.
Bustin, S.A., Quantification of mRNA using real-time
RT-PCR. Trends and problems. J Mol
Endocrinol,
29(1): 23-39, 2002. 43.
Glasel, J.A., Validity of nucleic acid purities monitored
by 260nm/280nm absorbance ratios. Biotechniques., 18(1): 62-63, 1994. 44.
Wong, L., Pearson, H., Fletcher, A., Marquis, C.P., and
Mahler, S., Comparison of the Efficiency of Moloney Murine Leukaemia
Virus (M-mulv) Reverse Transcriptase, rnase H--M-mulv Reverse
Transcriptase and Avian Myeloblastoma Leukaemia Virus (AMV) Reverse
Transcriptase for the Amplification of Human Immunoglobulin Genes.
Biotechnology Techniques, 12(6): 485-489, 1998. 45.
Fuchs, B,. Zhang, K., Rock,
M.G., Bolander, M.E., and Sarkar, G., High temperature cDNA synthesis
by
AMV reverse transcriptase improves the specificity of PCR. Mol
Biotechnol.,
12(3): 237-240, 1999. 46.
Fuchs, B., Zhang, K., Rock,
M.G., Bolander, M.E., and Sarkar, G., Repeat cDNA synthesis and RT-PCR
with
the same source of RNA. Mol Biotechnol., 12(3): 231-235, 1999. 47.
Schwabe, H., Stein, U., and
Walther W., High-copy cDNA amplification of minimal total RNA
quantities
for gene expression analyses. Mol Biotechnol., 14(2): 165-172, 2000. 48.
Hayward, A.L., Oefner, P.J., Sabatini, S., Kainer, D.B.,
Hinojos, C.A., and Doris ,P.A., Modelling and analysis of competitive
RT-PCR. Nucleic Acids Res., 26(11): 2511-2518, 1998. 49.
Freeman, W.M., Vrana, S.L.,
and Vrana, K.E., Use of elevated reverse transcription reaction
temperatures
in RT-PCR. Biotechniques., 20(5): 782-783, 1996. 50.
Raja, S., Luketich, J.D., Kelly, L.A., Ruff, D.W., and
Godfrey, T.E., Increased sensitivity of one-tube, quantitative RT-PCR.
Biotechniques, 29: 702-708, 2000. 51.
Sugita, M., Haney, J.L., Gemmill, R.M., and Franklin,
W.A., One-step duplex reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction
for quantitative assessment of RNA degradation. Analytical
Biochemistry, 295: 113-116, 2001. 52.
Marten, N.W., Burke, E.J., Hayden, J.M., and Straus,
D.S., Effect of amino acid limitation on the expression of 19 genes in
rat hepatoma cells. FASEB J, 8: 538-544, 1994. 53.
Foss, D.L., Baarsch, M.J., and Murtaugh, M.P., Regulation
of hypoxanthine phosphoribosyl transferase, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate
dehydrogenase and beta-actin mRNA expression in porcine immune cells
and tissues. Anim Biotechnol., 9: 67-78, 1998. 54.
Thellin, O., Zorzi, W., Lakaye, B., De Borman, B.,
Coumans, B., Hennen, G., Grisar, T., Igout, A., and Heinen, E.,
Housekeeping genes as internal standards: use and limits.
J Biotechnol., 75: 291-295, 1999. 55.
Goidin, D., Mamessier, A., Staquet, M.J., Schmitt, D.,
and Berthier-Vergnes, O., Ribosomal 18S RNA prevails over
glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase and beta-actin genes as
internal standard for quantitative comparison of mRNA levels in
invasive
and noninvasive human melanoma cell subpopulations. Anal Biochem.,
295(1):
17-21, 2001. 56.
Schmittgen, T.D., and Zakrajsek, B.A.., Effect of
experimental treatment on housekeeping gene expression: validation by
real-time, quantitative RT-PCR. J Biochem Biophys Methods., 46(1-2):
69-81, 2000. 57.
Cha, R.S., Thilly, W.G., Specificity, efficiency, and
fidelity of PCR. PCR Methods Appl. 3(3): 18-29, 1993. 58.
Kainz, P., The PCR plateau phase - towards an
understanding of its limitations. Biochim Biophys Acta., 1494: 23-27,
2000. 61.
Wittwer, C.T., Ririe, K.M.,
Andrew, R.V., David, D.A., Gundry, R.A., and Balis U.J., The
LightCycler:
a microvolume multi sample fluorimeter with rapid temperature control.
Biotechniques,
22: 176-181, 1997. 62.
Rasmussen, R., Quantification on the LightCycler. In:
Meuer, S, Wittwer, C, and Nakagawara, K, eds. Rapid Cycle Real-time
PCR, Methods and Applications Springer Press, Heidelberg; ISBN
3-540-66736-9, 21-34, 2001. 63.
Tichopad, A., Didier, A., and Pfaffl, M.W.,
Tissue-specific influence on real-time RT-PCR amplification kinetics.
Molecular and Cellular Probes (in press - 2003) 65.
Foy, C.A., and Parkes, H.C., Emerging Homogeneous
DNA-based Technologies in the Clinical Laboratory. Clinical Chemistry.,
47: 990-1000, 2001. 66.
Ginzinger,
D.G., Gene quantification using real-time quantitative PCR: an emerging
technology hits the mainstream. Exp Hematol., 30(6): 503-512, 2002. 70.
Reischl, U., and Kochanowski, B., Quantitative PCR. A
survey of the present technology. Mol Biotechnol., 3(1): 55-71, 1995. 71.
Ferre, F., Quantitative or semi-quantitative PCR: reality
versus myth. PCR Methods Appl., 2(1): 1-9, 1992.
73.
Morrison, T.B., Weis, J.J.,
and Wittwer, C.T., Quantification of low-copy transcripts by continuous
SYBR
Green I monitoring during amplification. Biotechniques., 24(6):
954-962,
1998. 74.
Wittwer, C.T., Herrmann, M.G., Gundry, C.N., and
Elenitoba-Johnson, K.S., Real-time multiplex PCR assays. Methods.,
25(4): 430-42, 2001. 75.
Holland, P.M., Abramson, R.D., Watson, R., and Gelfand,
D.H., Detection of specific polymerase chain reaction product by
utilizing the 5'-3' exonuclease activity of Thermus aquaticus DNA
polymerase. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 88(16): 7276-7280,
1991. 76.
Livak, K.J., ABI Prism 7700
Sequence detection System User Bulletin #2 Relative quantification of
gene
expression; 1997 & 2001. http://docs.appliedbiosystems.com/pebiodocs/04303859.pdf 77.
Förster,
V.T., Zwischenmolekulare Energiewanderung und Fluorescence. Annals of
Physics, Leipzig, 1948. 78.
Lakowicz, J.R., Energy transfer. In: Principles of
Fluorescent Spectroscopy, New York: Plenum Press,
pp. 303-339, 1983. 79.
Nitsche, A., Steuer, N., Schmidt, C.A., Landt, O., and
Siegert, W., Different real-time PCR formats compared for the
quantitative detection of human cytomegalovirus DNA. Clin Chem.,
45(11): 1932-1937, 1999. 81.
LightCycler Software ®,
Version 3.5; Roche Molecular Biochemicals, 2001. 82.
LightCycler Relative Quantification Software ®,
Version 1.0, Roche Molecular Biochemicals, 2001. 84.
Fronhoffs, S., Totzke, G., Stier, S., Wernert, N., Rothe,
M., Bruning, T., Koch, B., Sachinidis, A., Vetter, H., and Ko, Y., A
method for the rapid construction of cRNA standard
curves in quantitative real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain
reaction. Mol Cell Probes., 16(2): 99-110, 2002. 85.
Zimmermann, K., and Mannhalter, JW., Technical aspects of
quantitative competitive PCR. Biotechniques., 21(2): 268-279, 1996. 86.
Souaze, F., Ntodou-Thome, A., Tran, C.Y., Rostene, W.,
and Forgez, P., Quantitative RT-PCR: limits
and accuracy. Biotechniques., 21(2): 280-285, 1996. 90.
Livak, K.J., and Schmittgen, T.D., Analysis of relative
gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2^[-delta
delta C(T)] Method. Methods., 25(4): 402-408, 2001. 91.
Gentle, A., Anastasopoulos,
F., and Mc Brien, N.A., High-resolution semi-quantitative real-time PCR
without the use of a standard curve. Biotechniques., 31(3): 502-508,
2001. 92.
Rosenfeld, C.S., Yuan, X., Manikkam, M., Calder, M.D.,
Garverick, H.A. and Lubahn, D.B., Cloning, sequencing, and localization
of bovine estrogen receptor-beta within the ovarian
follicle. Biol Reprod. 60, 691-697, 1999. 93.
Walther, N., Lioutas, C., Tillmann, G., and Ivell, R.,
Cloning of bovine estrogen receptor beta (ER-beta): expression of novel
deleted isoforms in reproductive tissues. Mol Cell
Endocrinol. 152, 37-45, 1999. 94.
Hileman, S.M., Handa, R.J. and Jackson, G.L.,
Distribution of estrogen receptor-beta messenger ribonucleic acid in
the male sheep hypothalamus. Biol Reprod. 60, 1279-1284, 1999. 95.
Scott, C.J., Pereira, A.M.,
Rawson, J.A., Simmons, D.M., Rossmanith, W.G., Ing, N.H., Clarke, I.J.,
The
distribution of progesterone receptor immunoreactivity and mRNA in the
preoptic
area and hypothalamus of the ewe: up-regulation of progesterone
receptor
mRNA in the mediobasal hypothalamus by oestrogen. J Neuroendocrinol.
12:
565-575, 2000. 96.
Schütz, G., Tenth Adolf Butenandt lecture. Control
of gene expression by steroid hormones. Biol Chem. 369, 77-86, 1988. 97.
Jungblut, P.W., Gaues, J., Hughes, A., Kallweit, E.,
Sierralta, W., Szendro, P., and Wagner, R.K., Activation of
transcription-regulating proteins by steroids. J Steroid Biochem. 7,
1109-1116, 1976. 98.
Meijerink, J., Mandigers, C., van de Locht, L.,
Tonnissen, E., Goodsaid, F., and Raemaekers, J., A
novel method to compensate for different amplification efficiencies
between patient DNA samples in quantitative real-time PCR. J Mol Diagn.,
3(2): 55-61, 2001. 101.
oong, R., Ruschoff, J., and Tabiti, K., Detection of
colorectal micrometastasis by quantitative
RT-PCR of cytokeratin 20 mRNA. Roche Molecular Biochemicals internal
Publication, 2000. 102.
Muller, P.Y., Janovjak, H.,
Miserez, A.R., and Dobbie, Z., Processing of gene expression data
generated
by quantitative real-time RT-PCR. Biotechniques, 32(6): 1372-1378, 2002. 103.
Bhatia, P., Taylor, W.R., Greenberg, A.H., and Wright,
J.A., Comparison of glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase and
28S-ribosomal RNA gene expression as RNA loading controls for northern
blot analysis of cell lines of varying malignant potential. Anal
Biochem., 216: 223-226, 1994. 104.
Bereta, J., and Bereta, M.,
Stimulation of glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase mRNA levels by
endogenous
nitric oxide in cytokine-activated endothelium. Biochem Biophys Res
Commun.;
217: 363-369, 1995. 105.
Chang, T.J., Juan, C.C., Yin, P.H., Chi, C.W., and Tsay,
H.J., Up-regulation of beta-actin, cyclophilin and GAPDH in N1S1 rat
hepatoma. Oncol Rep., 5: 469-471, 1998. 106.
Zhang, J., and Snyder, S.H., Nitric oxide stimulates
auto-ADP-ribosylation of glyceraldehydes 3 phosphate dehydrogenase.
PNAS, 89: 9382-9385, 1992. 108.
Silva, J.J.R., Williams, R.J.P., (eds) The biological
Chemistry of the elements: The inorganic chemistry of life. Clarendon
Press, Oxford, 1991.
109.
Oestreicher, P., Cousins, R.J., Zinc uptake by
basolateral membrane vesicles from rat small intestine. J Nutr. 119:
639-646, 1989. 110.
Reyes, J.G., Zinc transport
in mammalian cells. Am J Physiol; 270, C401-410, 1996. 111.
Cousins, R.J., Zinc. In: Present knowledge in nutrition,
Seventh edition (Filer LJ & Ziegler EE,
eds), Internat. Life Sci. Inst. Nutr. Foundation, Washington DC.,
263-306,
1996. 112.
acnet, F., Watkins, D.W., Ripoche, P., Studies of zinc
transport into brush-border membrane vesicles isolated from pig small
intestine. Biochim Biophys Acta.; 1024: 323-330, 1990. 113.
Brady, F.O., The physiological function of
Metallothionein. Trends Biochem. Sci.; 7:
143-145, 1982. 116.
Das, S., Mohapatra, S.C., and Hsu, J.C., Studies on
primer-dimer formation in polymerase chain
reaction (PCR). Biotechnology Techniques, 13(10): 643-646, 1999. 117.
Ririe, K.M., Rasmussen, R.P., and Wittwer, C.T., Product
differentiation by analysis of DNA melting curves during the polymerase
chain reaction. Anal Biochem., 245(2): 154-160, 1997. 119.
Vandesompele, J., De Paepe,
A., and Speleman, F., Elimination of Primer-Dimer Artifacts and Genomic
Coamplification Using a Two-Step SYBR Green I Real-Time RT-PCR. Anal
Biochem., 303(1): 95-98, 2002. 120.
Brownie, J., Shawcross, S.,
Theaker, J., Whitcombe, D., Ferrie, R., Newton, C., and Little, S., The
elimination of primer-dimer accumulation in PCR. Nucleic Acids Res.,
25(16): 3235-3241, 1997. 121.
Sturzenbaum, S.R., Transfer
RNA reduces the formation of primer artifacts during quantitative PCR.
Biotechniques., 27(1): 50-52, 1999. 122.
How to Reduce Primer Dimers
in a LightCycler PCR, Roche Diagnostics Technical Note No. 1, 1999. 123.
Peccoud, J., and Jacob, C.,
Theoretical uncertainty of measurements using quantitative polymerase
chain
reaction. Biophys J., 71(1): 101-108, 1996. 124.
Liu, W., and Saint, D.A., Validation of a quantitative
method for real time PCR kinetics. Biochem Biophys
Res Commun., 294(2): 347-353, 2002. 125.
Liu, W., and Saint, D.A., A
new quantitative method of real time reverse transcription polymerase
chain
reaction assay based on simulation of polymerase chain reaction
kinetics.
Anal Biochem., 302(1): 52-59, 2002. 126.
Raeymaekers, L., Basic principles of quantitative PCR.
Mol Biotechnol., 15(2): 115-122, 2000. 127.
Chelly, J., Kaplan, J.C., Maire, P., Gautron, S., and
Kahn, A., Transcription of the dystrophin gene
in human muscle and non-muscle tissue. Nature., 333(6176): 858-860,
1988. 128.
Schnell, S., and Mendoza, C., Theoretical description of
the polymerase chain reaction. J Theor Biol., 188(3):
313-318, 1997. 129.
Jung,
R., Soondrum, K., Neumaier, M., Quantitative PCR. Clin Chem Lab Med.,
38(9): 833-836, 2000. 130.
Karge, W.H., Schaefer, E.J., and Ordovas J.M.,
Quantification of mRNA by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using an
internal standard and a non-radioactive detection method. Methods Mol
Biol, 110: 43-61, 1998. 131.
Zhong, H., and Simons, J.W., Direct comparison of GAPDH,
beta-actin, cyclophilin, and 28S rRNA as
internal standards for quantifying RNA levels under hypoxia. Biochem
Biophys Res Commun., 259(3): 523-526, 1999. 132.
Solanas, M., Moral, R., and
Escrich, E., Unsuitability of using ribosomal RNA as loading control
for
Northern blot analyses related to the imbalance between messenger and
ribosomal
RNA content in rat mammary tumors. Anal Biochem., 288(1): 99-102, 2001. 133.
Haberhausen, G., Pinsl, J.,
Kuhn, C.C., and Markert-Hahn C., Comparative study of different
standardization concepts in quantitative competitive reverse
transcription-PCR assays. J Clin Microbiol, 3: 628-633, 1988. 134.
Zhu G, Chang Y, Zuo J, Dong
X, Zhang M, Hu G, and Fang F., Fudenine, a C-terminal truncated rat
homologue of mouse prominin, is blood glucose-regulated and can
up-regulate the expression of GAPDH. Biochem Biophys Res Commun.,
281(4): 951-956, 2001. 135.
eist, M., Pfaffl, M.W., Steiner, A., and Blum, JW,
Quantitative mRNA analysis of bovine 5-HT receptor
subtypes in brain, abomasum, and intestine by real-time PCR. Journal
of Receptors and Signal Transduction 23(4): 271-287 136.
Neuvians, T
P,
Pfaffl, M W. Berisha, B, and Schams, D, A new isoforms of the bovine
insulin
receptor in the corpus luteum and the mRNA expression of IR-A, IR-B and
IGF-2
receptor during oestrus cycle and induced luteolysis. Endocrine (22/2):
93–100. 137.
Sheskin, D., Handbook of Parametric & Nonparametric
Statistical Procedures. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL, 2000. 138.
Manly, B., Randomization, Bootstrap and Monte Carlo
Methods in Biology. Chapman & Hall, 1997. |