Journal
NATURE METHODS
Volume 2, Issue 5, Pages 351-356Publisher
NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nmeth0605-477a
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- NIEHS NIH HHS [ES11391, ES11387, ES11384, ES11375, ES11399] Funding Source: Medline
Ask authors/readers for more resources
To facilitate collaborative research efforts between multi-investigator teams using DNA microarrays, we identified sources of error and data variability between laboratories and across microarray platforms, and methods to accommodate this variability. RNA expression data were generated in seven laboratories, which compared two standard RNA samples using 12 microarray platforms. At Least two standard microarray types (one spotted, one commercial) were used by all laboratories. Reproducibility for most platforms within any laboratory was typically good, but reproducibility between platforms and across laboratories was generally poor. Reproducibility between laboratories increased markedly when standardized protocols were implemented for RNA labeling, hybridization, microarray processing, data acquisition and data normalization. Reproducibility was highest when analysis was based on biological themes defined by enriched Gene Ontology (GO) categories. These findings indicate that microarray results can be comparable across multiple laboratories, especially when a common platform and set of procedures are used.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available