4.2 Article

Reference genes in the developing murine brain and in differentiating embryonic stem cells

期刊

NEUROLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 34, 期 7, 页码 664-668

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1179/1743132812Y.0000000060

关键词

Brain; Development; Real-time PCR; Reference gene; Stem cells

资金

  1. German Research Foundation [SFB665]
  2. Sonnenfeld Stiftung
  3. Berliner Krebsgesellschaft e.V.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Gene expression analysis via quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) is a key approach in biological and medical research. Here, variations between runs and samples are compensated for by in-parallel analysis of reference genes, which require a most stable expression throughout all samples and experimental procedures to function as internal standards. In reality, there is no universal reference gene; but rather, assumed reference genes vary widely among various cell types. This demands an evaluation of reference genes for each specific experimental purpose, especially in the case of developmental studies. The aim of the present study was to identify suitable reference genes for gene expression analysis in the developing murine brain neocortex in vivo and in mouse embryonic stem cells (mESC) throughout differentiation in vitro. Methods: The five candidate genes Actb, 18s, Gapdh, Hprt, and RpII were analyzed throughout development in vivo and in vitro using the quartiles of C-q values, fold change, coefficient of variation (CV) and the difference between maximum minus twofold standard deviation and mean as the criteria to evaluate their expression stability. Results: We found that RpII was the most stable expressed gene in mESC throughout differentiation, while in the developing murine neocortex Gapdh showed the highest expression stability. Conclusions: Based on our results, we suggest for gene expression analysis in the context of neurodevelopment the usage of RpII as a reference gene for mESC and Gapdh or Hprt for the murine neocortex.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据