Skern Rasmus, Frost Petter, Nilsen Frank
Marine Genome Biology, Institute of Marine Research, N-5817 Bergen, Norway.
BMC Mol Biol. 2005 Apr 26;6:10. doi: 10.1186/1471-2199-6-10.
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.
Analyses of Q-PCR results from a salmon louse starvation experiment show that, even with apparently good raw data, different analytical approaches 12 may lead to opposing biological conclusions.
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.
在通过定量实时聚合酶链反应(Q-PCR)估算相对转录本丰度时,我们发现结果会因所选的数据分析方法而有显著差异。
对鲑鱼虱饥饿实验的Q-PCR结果分析表明,即使原始数据看似良好,不同的分析方法也可能得出相反的生物学结论。
这些结果强调了在分析Q-PCR数据时谨慎的重要性,并表明不加批判地常规应用分析方法最终会导致错误结论。我们不知道这个问题的严重程度,也没有通用的解决方案。然而,我们强烈建议在分析Q-PCR结果时要谨慎,例如使用两种或更多种分析方法来验证结论。我们认为应该共同努力使Q-PCR结果的分析和验证方法标准化。