4.6 Article

Validation of Reference Genes in Solenopsis invicta in Different Developmental Stages, Castes and Tissues

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057718

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [30900942]
  2. Guangdong Science and Technology Plan [2011B031500017]
  3. Guangdong College Students' Innovative Experiment Project

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To accurately assess gene expression levels, it is essential to normalize real-time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) data with suitable internal reference genes. For the red imported fire ant, Solenopsis invicta, reliable reference genes to assess the transcript expression levels of the target genes have not been previously investigated. In this study, we examined the expression levels of five candidate reference genes (rpl18, ef1-beta, act, GAPDH, and tbp) in different developmental stages, castes and tissues of S. invicta. To evaluate the suitability of these genes as endogenous controls, three software-based approaches (geNorm, BestKeeper and NormFinder) and one web-based comprehensive tool (RefFinder) were used to analyze and rank the tested genes. Furthermore, the optimal number of reference gene(s) was determined by the pairwise variation value. Our data showed that two of the five candidate genes, rpl18 and ef1-beta, were the most suitable reference genes because they have the most stable expression among different developmental stages, castes and tissues in S. invicta. Although widely used as reference gene in other species, in S. invicta the act gene has high variation in expression and was consequently excluded as a reliable reference gene. The two validated reference genes, rpl18 and ef1-beta, can be widely used for quantification of target gene expression with RT-qPCR technology in S. invicta.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available