4.7 Article

Reference gene selection in bovine caruncular epithelial cells under pregnancy-associated hormones exposure

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-17069-3

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. University of Life Sciences in Lublin [WKB/MN-10/WET/20]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to identify endogenous reference genes with stable expression for transcriptional regulation research during pregnancy establishment and maintenance. RPS9 and SUZ12 were found to be the most suitable reference genes, and they can be used for studying gene expression in both normal and compromised pregnancies.
Examination of transcriptional regulation occurring during pregnancy establishment and maintenance requires the identification of endogenous reference genes characterized by high expression stability. Since the expression of some reference genes may be modulated by pregnancy-associated hormones, the goal of our study was to identify suitable reference genes unaffected by hormonal treatment. In our study bovine caruncular epithelial cells were subjected to progesterone, estrogen and prostaglandin F-2 alpha treatment. Ten candidate reference genes (ACTR1A, CNOT11, HDAC1, HPRT1, RPL19, RPS9, SDHA, SUZ12, UXT and ZNF131) were evaluated with the use of four approaches (geNorm, NormFinder, BestKeeper, delta Ct). We found that RPS9 and SUZ12 displayed the highest expression stability in the tested material. Moreover, HPRT1 and SDHA were found inappropriate for RT-qPCR data normalization as they demonstrated the highest expression variability out of all candidates analysed. Hence geNorm calculations shown that the use of just two best-performing genes would be sufficient for obtaining reliable results, we propose that RPS9 and SUZ12 be used as suitable endogenous controls in future studies investigating gene expression in normal and compromised pregnancies.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available