Relative transcript quantification by Quantitative PCR: Roughly right or precisely wrong?

49Citations
Citations of this article
176Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: When estimating relative transcript abundances by quantitative real-time PCR (Q-PCR) we found that the results can vary dramatically depending on the method chosen for data analysis. Results: Analyses of Q-PCR results from a salmon louse starvation experiment show that, even with apparently good raw data, different analytical approaches [1,2] may lead to opposing biological conclusions. Conclusion: The results emphasise the importance of being cautious when analysing Q-PCR data and indicate that uncritical routine application of an analytical method will eventually result in incorrect conclusions. We do not know the extent of, or have a universal solution to this problem. However, we strongly recommend caution when analysing Q-PCR results e.g. by using two or more analytical approaches to validate conclusions. In our view a common effort should be made to standardise methods for analysis and validation of Q-PCR results. © 2005 Skern et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Skern, R., Frost, P., & Nilsen, F. (2005). Relative transcript quantification by Quantitative PCR: Roughly right or precisely wrong? BMC Molecular Biology, 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2199-6-10

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free