Understanding qPCR and gene expression changes
#1
Posted 31 March 2009 - 07:28 AM
Would really appreciate some help
thanks
#2
Posted 31 March 2009 - 08:13 AM
What tells you if a gene is up or down regulated is your reference gene (also known as housekeeping gene). Likely you are aware about the use of genes like GAPDH, 18S and beta-actin as genes used to normalize the loading of RNA in experiments like Northern blots. qPCR uses genes like this for the same reason. The concept is that these housekeeping genes change very little, or not at all, in expression across your experiment so any change in the signal generated by these genes is due to things like differences in the amount of cDNA loaded in each reaction. By normalizing the signal generated by your genes of interest to the signal generated by a housekeeping gene then you can infer if your genes are up or down regulated.
Ivan
Carlsbad, CA
#3
Posted 31 March 2009 - 10:02 AM
ivanbio, on Mar 31 2009, 06:13 PM, said:
Thank you very much
#4
Posted 31 March 2009 - 12:05 PM
Sciencefreak, on Mar 31 2009, 02:02 PM, said:
ivanbio, on Mar 31 2009, 06:13 PM, said:
Thank you very much
Yes, the higher the E^CP, the higher the relative expression and vice versa. As you said before, these are RELATIVE estimates of gene expression. qRT-PCR without precise standard curves cannot be used to determine the absolute change in gene expression. Also, keep in mind that mRNA changes do not always equate to changes at the protein level.
Science is simply common sense at its best that is rigidly accurate in observation and merciless to fallacy in logic.
Thomas Henry Huxley
#5
Posted 03 April 2009 - 07:53 AM
I am not sure that I follow your explanation of the Ct values. The way you know which gene is up regulated versus down regulated is by comparing your results to a reference sample. Note that this is a sample, not a gene. For example, if you were looking at the expression of your gene of interest across multiple tissues (muscle, brain, kidney, etc), then you would choose one of these tissues as the reference sample (for example liver). By this rationale, any tissue that had a higher Ct for your gene of interest than the Ct for liver would be down regulated (relative to liver), while any tissue that showed a lower Ct for your gene of interest than the Ct for liver would be up regulated.
Hope this helps.
Sciencefreak, on Mar 31 2009, 11:02 AM, said:
Ivan
Carlsbad, CA
#6
Posted 19 April 2009 - 11:13 AM
thanks
#7
Posted 22 April 2009 - 11:00 AM
The fit point and the second derivate methods are just two ways of determining the cycle threshold value. I cannot really think of any advantages or disadvantages for either one: they are just two ways of obtaining very similar results.
Sciencefreak, on Apr 19 2009, 12:13 PM, said:
thanks
Ivan
Carlsbad, CA
#8
Posted 17 September 2009 - 12:16 AM
ivanbio, on Mar 31 2009, 06:13 PM, said:
I am just getting started with RT qPCR, but what I understand from my supervisor, many traditional housekeeping genes are actually not expressed as predictably as we like them to be and there is great variations among cell types and tissues. Therefore it should be stressed that a given tissue must be analyzed for proper normalization genes before doing your experiment, or there's a risk that you normalize to a gene that will lead to wrong interpretation of your data.
A former student of the lab did this work which explains the problem in more detail: Bonefeld BE, Elfving B, Wegener G: Reference genes for normalization: a study of rat brain tissue. Synapse 2008, 62:302-309
#9
Posted 28 December 2009 - 05:13 PM
#10
Posted 24 February 2010 - 06:05 AM
You might like to check the following article - it really discusses why you should always check if the reference genes you have chosen to normalize against can be used under your experimental conditions.
Guénin, S., et al, 2009. Normalization of qRT-PCR data: the necessity of adopting a systematic, experimental conditions-specific, validation of references. Journal of Experimental Botany 60, 487-493.
And the article for qBASE:
Hellemans, J., et al, 2007. qBase relative quantification framework and software for management and automated analysis of real-time quantitative PCR data. Genome Biology 8.
Edited by flammaefata, 24 February 2010 - 06:32 AM.
#11
Posted 01 June 2011 - 12:35 AM
Myosin II, on 17 September 2009 - 12:16 AM, said:
ivanbio, on Mar 31 2009, 06:13 PM, said:
I am just getting started with RT qPCR, but what I understand from my supervisor, many traditional housekeeping genes are actually not expressed as predictably as we like them to be and there is great variations among cell types and tissues. Therefore it should be stressed that a given tissue must be analyzed for proper normalization genes before doing your experiment, or there's a risk that you normalize to a gene that will lead to wrong interpretation of your data.
A former student of the lab did this work which explains the problem in more detail: Bonefeld BE, Elfving B, Wegener G: Reference genes for normalization: a study of rat brain tissue. Synapse 2008, 62:302-309
Thank you so much for that reference paper, however, I want to know if the RT-PCR was done using oligo-dT or random hexamer primers.













