Comparative evaluation of linear and exponential amplification techniques for expression profiling at the single-cell level

被引:46
作者
Subkhankulova, T
Livesey, FJ
机构
[1] Univ Cambridge, Gurdon Inst, Cambridge CB2 1QN, England
[2] Univ Cambridge, Dept Biochem, Cambridge CB2 1QN, England
基金
英国惠康基金; 英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
D O I
10.1186/gb-2006-7-3-r18
中图分类号
Q81 [生物工程学(生物技术)]; Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 0836 ; 090102 ; 100705 ;
摘要
Background: Single-cell microarray expression profiling requires 10(8)-10(9)-fold amplification of the picogram amounts of total RNA typically found in eukaryotic cells. Several methods for RNA amplification are in general use, but little consideration has been given to the comparative analysis of those methods in terms of the overall validity of the data generated when amplifying from single-cell amounts of RNA, rather than their empirical performance in single studies. Results: We tested the performance of three methods for amplifying single-cell amounts of RNA under ideal conditions: T7-based in vitro transcription; switching mechanism at 5' end of RNA template ( SMART) PCR amplification; and global PCR amplification. All methods introduced amplification-dependent noise when mRNA was amplified 10(8)-fold, compared with data from unamplified cDNA. PCR-amplified cDNA demonstrated the smallest number of differences between two parallel replicate samples and the best correlation between independent amplifications from the same cell type, with SMART outperforming global PCR amplification. SMART had the highest true-positive rate and the lowest false-positive rate when comparing expression between two different cell types, but had the lowest absolute discovery rate of all three methods. Direct comparison of the performance of SMART and global PCR amplification on single-cell amounts of total RNA and on single neural stem cells confirmed these findings. Conclusion: Under the conditions tested, PCR amplification was more reliable than linear amplification for detecting true expression differences between samples. SMART amplification had a higher true-positive rate than global amplification, but at the expense of a considerably lower absolute discovery rate and a systematic compression of observed expression ratios.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]   Measuring agreement in method comparison studies [J].
Bland, JM ;
Altman, DG .
STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 1999, 8 (02) :135-160
[2]   ANALYSIS OF GENE-EXPRESSION IN A COMPLEX DIFFERENTIATION HIERARCHY BY GLOBAL AMPLIFICATION OF CDNA FROM SINGLE CELLS [J].
BRADY, G ;
BILLIA, F ;
KNOX, J ;
HOANG, T ;
KIRSCH, IR ;
VOURA, EB ;
HAWLEY, RG ;
CUMMING, R ;
BUCHWALD, M ;
SIMINOVITCH, K ;
MIYAMOTO, N ;
BOEHMELT, G ;
ISCOVE, NN .
CURRENT BIOLOGY, 1995, 5 (08) :909-922
[3]  
BRADY G, 1993, METHOD ENZYMOL, V225, P611
[4]  
Chenchik A., 1998, GENE CLONING ANAL RT, P305
[5]   Expression profiling of single cells using 3 prime end amplification (TPEA) PCR [J].
Dixon, AK ;
Richardson, PJ ;
Lee, K ;
Carter, NP ;
Freeman, TC .
NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH, 1998, 26 (19) :4426-4431
[6]  
Dudoit S, 2002, STAT SINICA, V12, P111
[7]   ANALYSIS OF GENE-EXPRESSION IN SINGLE LIVE NEURONS [J].
EBERWINE, J ;
YEH, H ;
MIYASHIRO, K ;
CAO, YX ;
NAIR, S ;
FINNELL, R ;
ZETTEL, M ;
COLEMAN, P .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 1992, 89 (07) :3010-3014
[8]   Evaluation of sense-strand mRNA amplification by comparative quantitative PCR [J].
Goff, LA ;
Bowers, J ;
Schwalm, J ;
Howerton, K ;
Getts, RC ;
Hart, RP .
BMC GENOMICS, 2004, 5 (1)
[9]  
Ihaka R., 1996, J COMPUTATIONAL GRAP, V5, P299, DOI [10.1080/10618600.1996.10474713, 10.2307/1390807, DOI 10.1080/10618600.1996.10474713]
[10]   Representation is faithfully preserved in global cDNA amplified exponentially from sub-picogram quantities of mRNA [J].
Iscove, NN ;
Barbara, M ;
Gu, M ;
Gibson, M ;
Modi, C ;
Winegarden, N .
NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2002, 20 (09) :940-943