Nucleic Acid Research Group Study:

Like dokumenter
Dynamic Programming Longest Common Subsequence. Class 27

5 E Lesson: Solving Monohybrid Punnett Squares with Coding

Andrew Gendreau, Olga Rosenbaum, Anthony Taylor, Kenneth Wong, Karl Dusen

SERK1/2 Acts as a Partner of EMS1 to Control Anther Cell Fate Determination in Arabidopsis

Slope-Intercept Formula

Unit Relational Algebra 1 1. Relational Algebra 1. Unit 3.3

Exercise 1: Phase Splitter DC Operation

Dean Zollman, Kansas State University Mojgan Matloob-Haghanikar, Winona State University Sytil Murphy, Shepherd University

Bruk av genteknologiske analyser ved diagnostikk av luftveisinfeksjoner. Gardermoen Svein Arne Nordbø

SVM and Complementary Slackness

UNIVERSITY OF OSLO DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Metodisk kvalitetsvurdering av systematisk oversikt. Rigmor C Berg Kurs H, mars 2019

Passasjerer med psykiske lidelser Hvem kan fly? Grunnprinsipper ved behandling av flyfobi

Examination paper for (BI 2015) (Molekylærbiologi, laboratoriekurs)

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO

KROPPEN LEDER STRØM. Sett en finger på hvert av kontaktpunktene på modellen. Da får du et lydsignal.

Medisinsk statistikk, KLH3004 Dmf, NTNU Styrke- og utvalgsberegning

Eksamensoppgave i PSY3100 Forskningsmetode - Kvantitativ

Emnedesign for læring: Et systemperspektiv

GeWare: A data warehouse for gene expression analysis

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO ØKONOMISK INSTITUTT

Cylindrical roller bearings

UNIVERSITY OF OSLO. Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences

Læringsmål, vurderingsformer og gradert karakterskala hva er sammenhengen? Om du ønsker, kan du sette inn navn, tittel på foredraget, o.l. her.

Databases 1. Extended Relational Algebra

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO ØKONOMISK INSTITUTT

EKSAMENSOPPGAVE I BI2034 Samfunnsøkologi EXAMINATION IN: BI Community ecology

Den som gjør godt, er av Gud (Multilingual Edition)

PATIENCE TÅLMODIGHET. Is the ability to wait for something. Det trenger vi når vi må vente på noe

Information search for the research protocol in IIC/IID

Utstyr for avstandsmåling. Dommersamling 14. mars 2015 Stein Jodal

Accuracy of Alternative Baseline Methods

Holdning til psykisk helsevern og tvangsbehandling. Landsomfattende undersøkelse 2009 og 2011, 2000 respondenter

Salting of dry-cured ham

SAS FANS NYTT & NYTTIG FRA VERKTØYKASSA TIL SAS 4. MARS 2014, MIKKEL SØRHEIM

ADDENDUM SHAREHOLDERS AGREEMENT. by and between. Aker ASA ( Aker ) and. Investor Investments Holding AB ( Investor ) and. SAAB AB (publ.

Eksamensoppgave i PSY3100 Forskningsmetode - Kvantitativ

STILLAS - STANDARD FORSLAG FRA SEF TIL NY STILLAS - STANDARD

Physical origin of the Gouy phase shift by Simin Feng, Herbert G. Winful Opt. Lett. 26, (2001)

Godkjenning av hydrogen som drivstoff på skip

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO ØKONOMISK INSTITUTT

05/08/2002 Bugøynes. 16/08/2002 Bugøynes

Cylindrical roller bearings

STØTTEMATERIALE TIL FORELESNINGENE OM SKATT

Kartleggingsskjema / Survey

Kalibrering. Hvordan sikrer Norsonic sporbarhet av måleresultatene. Ole-Herman Bjor

Interventions in the Cerebral palsy follow-up program: Reidun Jahnsen, PT PhD

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO

Emneevaluering GEOV272 V17

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO

Speed Racer Theme. Theme Music: Cartoon: Charles Schultz / Jef Mallett Peanuts / Frazz. September 9, 2011 Physics 131 Prof. E. F.

Neural Network. Sensors Sorter

Hvor mye praktisk kunnskap har du tilegnet deg på dette emnet? (1 = ingen, 5 = mye)

Integrating Evidence into Nursing Practice Using a Standard Nursing Terminology

Innovasjonsvennlig anskaffelse

OECD GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS

Den europeiske byggenæringen blir digital. hva skjer i Europa? Steen Sunesen Oslo,

Han Ola of Han Per: A Norwegian-American Comic Strip/En Norsk-amerikansk tegneserie (Skrifter. Serie B, LXIX)

1. Explain the language model, what are the weaknesses and strengths of this model?

GEOV219. Hvilket semester er du på? Hva er ditt kjønn? Er du...? Er du...? - Annet postbachelor phd

Effect of physical activity on learning?

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO ØKONOMISK INSTITUTT

Modeling Longitudinal Dyadic Data in the SEM Framework

Dagens tema: Eksempel Klisjéer (mønstre) Tommelfingerregler

Satellite Stereo Imagery. Synthetic Aperture Radar. Johnson et al., Geosphere (2014)

Feilsøking innen EKV. FLYTSKJEMA en strukturert tilnærming for å finne årsak til EKVavvik HVORFOR?

Sammensatte Forsterkningsskjemaer

Exploratory Analysis of a Large Collection of Time-Series Using Automatic Smoothing Techniques

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO ØKONOMISK INSTITUTT

RF Power Capacitors Class1. 5kV Discs

SRP s 4th Nordic Awards Methodology 2018

Flått og flåttbårne sykdommer i Norge - med resultater fra lokale studier

Ole Isak Eira Masters student Arctic agriculture and environmental management. University of Tromsø Sami University College

Hvor mye teoretisk kunnskap har du tilegnet deg på dette emnet? (1 = ingen, 5 = mye)

TUSEN TAKK! BUTIKKEN MIN! ...alt jeg ber om er.. Maren Finn dette og mer i. ... finn meg på nett! Grafiske lisenser.

Guidance. CBEST, CSET, Middle Level Credential

Verifiable Secret-Sharing Schemes

Sammensatte Forsterkningsskjemaer

RF Power Capacitors Class kV Discs with Moisture Protection

TUSEN TAKK! BUTIKKEN MIN! ...alt jeg ber om er.. Maren Finn dette og mer i. ... finn meg på nett! Grafiske lisenser.

Supplementary Materials for

Method validation for NO (10 ppm to 1000 ppm) in nitrogen using the Fischer Rosemount chemiluminescence analyser NOMPUMELELO LESHABANE

SYNERGIES BETWEEN MEASURES FOR ADAPTATION, EMISSIONS TO AIR AND WATER QUALITY IN AGRICULTURE

Hvordan ser pasientene oss?

TUSEN TAKK! BUTIKKEN MIN! ...alt jeg ber om er.. Maren Finn dette og mer i. ... finn meg på nett! Grafiske lisenser.

Call function of two parameters

The Norwegian Citizen Panel, Accepted Proposals

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO ØKONOMISK INSTITUTT

Eksamen PSY1010 PSYC1100 Forskningsmetode I vår 2013

Public roadmap for information management, governance and exchange SINTEF

Eiendomsverdi. The housing market Update September 2013

Kurskategori 2: Læring og undervisning i et IKT-miljø. vår

NO X -chemistry modeling for coal/biomass CFD

The regulation requires that everyone at NTNU shall have fire drills and fire prevention courses.

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO ØKONOMISK INSTITUTT

Personvernreglenes betydning for stordata, analyse, AI, agreggerte data, etc

VLSI Design for Yield on Chip Level

Moving Objects. We need to move our objects in 3D space.

Splitting the differential Riccati equation

Transkript:

Nucleic Acid Research Group 2007-2008 Study: A Comparison of Different Priming Strategies for cdna Synthesis by Reverse Transcriptase as Measured by Real-Time RT-qPCR

NARG Survey Results for Types of Primers Used for RT Reactions Reverse Transcription Primer Used Random primers Oligo(dT) Gene-specific primer Random primers and oligo(dt) mixed Sample is provided 2007 2004 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 # of respondents

Literature Suggested Long Randomers Were More Effective Than Short Randomers In Generating cdna Stangegaard, et. al., BioTechniques 40:649, 2006 Random Pentadecamer (15-mer) Assessed resultant cdna over a micorarray

Study Goal To evaluate priming strategies used in the reverse transcriptase (RT) reaction to make cdna for use in realtime qpcr Compare randomers, oligo(dt), anchored oligo(dt), and GSP Compare randomers of different lengths Compare combinations of randomers and Oligo (dt)

Reverse Transcriptase Method Primers (synthesized by Integrated DNA Technologies) Randomers: 6-mer, 9-mer, 12-mer, 15-mer, 18-mer, and 21-mer Oligo(dT) 20 and Anchored Oligo(dT) 20 All Randomer with oligo (dt) or anchored oligo (dt) combinations Gene Specific Primers: β-actin, β-glucuronidase, TATA Binding Protein No Primer and No Primer, No RT RNA FirstChoice Human Brain Reference RNA (Ambion) One of the same reference RNAs used as an External RNA Control (ERC) in the MAQC study (Nature Biotechnology: 24, 1132 1139, 2006) RT Assay SuperScript III cdna synthesis kit per manufacturer s (Invitrogen Corp) suggested protocol 100 ng total RNA/reaction Primer (final conc. for 20 μl rxn) Randomer: 4 μm Oligo (dt): 2.5 μm Anchored oligo (dt): 2.5 μm Gene specific: 100 nm Combos: 2 μm randomer + 2 μm oligo dt (or anchored oligo dt) cdna Synthesis Randomers and Randomer combos: 25 C, 10 min then 50 C, 50 min Oligo (dt), Anchored Oligo (dt), GSP: 50 C, 50 min Triplicate reactions

Bioanalyzer Analysis of the Study RNA

Quantitative PCR Methods qpcr Assay cdna: [Primer]: Probe: Set Up Method: Chemistry: Replication: 10 ng RNA equivalents from RT rxn Individual Lab specified Individual Lab specified Individual Lab specified Individual Lab specified Each RT rxn run in duplicate wells qpcr Results Collected Ct values ΔCt = Ct primer -Ct no primer

Study Design Human Brain Reference RNA used for Microarray Study 100 ng Total RNA per RT Reaction SuperScript III 25 RT priming conditions to test 3 genes: β-actin, β-glucouronidase, TATA Binding Protein Random primers (6) Random primers + Anchored (dt) (6) Random primers + Oligo (dt) (6) Oligo (dt) (1) Anchored Oligo (dt) (1) No primer +enzyme (1) No primer, no enzyme (1) Gene specific primers (3) RT reactions in triplicate Duplicate PCR reactions on each RT reaction Run with TaqMan Chemistries

Real-Time qpcr Assay Maps hβ-actin transcript hβ-actin 5 695 bases 3 (NM_001101) Total length - 1793 bases 71 bases 344 hβ-glucuronidase transcript 5 bases (NM_000181) hβ-gus 3 Total length - 2245 bases 66 bases htata Binding Protein transcript 746 bases 5 (NM_003194) htbp 3 Total length - 1867 bases 80 bases

Statistical Analysis The effect of each variable on Ct or ΔCt levels were assessed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the JMP v 5.01 Statistical Discovery Software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). The green diamonds represent the mean and the standard error which is a pooled estimate of the variance. A Student s t-test was used to assess for significant difference levels (P < 0.05) between the groups contained within each variable.

ALL GENES (ASSAYS)

40 40 30 30 20 20 Effect of Primer on Ct (All Genes) Ct Ct 12mer 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) 12mer/Oligo(dT) 15mer 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) 15mer/Oligo(dT) 18mer 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) 18mer/Oligo(dT) 21mer 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) 21mer/Oligo(dT) 6mer 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) 6mer/Oligo(dT) 9mer 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) 9mer/Oligo(dT) AnchOligo(dT) GUS NoPrimer Oligo(dT) TBP b-actin Primer P < 0.0001

Effect of Primer on Ct (All Genes) Primer Level* Mean Ct (N) NoPrimer A 29.12 (101) TBP A B 28.99 (33) 21mer B C 27.14 (102) GUS B C 26.92 (27) 15mer C 26.78 (102) 18mer C 26.66 (101) 15mer/Oligo(dT) C 26.42 (100) 12mer C 26.39 (102) 18mer/Oligo(dT) C 26.35 (100) Oligo(dT) C 26.34 (102) 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) C 26.33 (102) AnchOligo(dT) C 26.32 (99) 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) C 26.27 (101) 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) C 26.23 (102) 21mer/Oligo(dT) C 26.16 (102) 12mer/Oligo(dT) C 26.15 (102) 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) C 26.14 (102) 6mer C 26.04 (102) 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) C 26.01 (101) 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) C 25.99 (101) 9mer C 25.94 (101) 6mer/Oligo(dT) C 25.94 (102) 9mer/Oligo(dT) C 25.91 (101) β-actin D 20.05 (36) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0-1 -1-2 -2-3 -3-4 -4 delta Ct Ct 12mer 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) 12mer/Oligo(dT) 15mer 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) 15mer/Oligo(dT) 18mer 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) 18mer/Oligo(dT) 21mer 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) 21mer/Oligo(dT) 6mer 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) 6mer/Oligo(dT) 9mer 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) 9mer/Oligo(dT) AnchOligo(dT) GUS NoPrimer Oligo(dT) TBP b-actin 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Effect of Primer on ΔCt (All Genes) Primer P < 0.0001

Effect of Primer on ΔCt (All Genes) Primer Level* Mean ΔCt (N) TBP A 4.95 (33) GUS A 4.56 (27) 9mer/Oligo(dT) B 3.45 (101) 9mer B 3.44 (101) 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) B 3.39 (101) 6mer/Oligo(dT) B C 3.37 (102) 6mer B C D 3.28 (102) 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D 3.25 (101) 12mer/Oligo(dT) B C D 3.16 (102) 21mer/Oligo(dT) B C D 3.15 (102) 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D 3.12 (102) 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D E 3.10 (101) 18mer/Oligo(dT) B C D E 3.09 (100) 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D E 3.08 (102) 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) C D E 2.98 (102) Oligo(dT) C D E 2.97 (102) 12mer D E F 2.92 (102) AnchOligo(dT) D E F 2.90 (99) 15mer/Oligo(dT) D E F 2.90 (100) 18mer E F G 2.71 (101) 15mer F G H 2.53 (102) β-actin G H 2.19 (36) 21mer H 2.17 (102) NoPrimer I 0.11 (101) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05)

Effect of Primer Classification on Ct 40 40 Primer Class Level* Mean (N) Rand A 26.49 (610) O(dT) A B 26.34 (102) Ct Ct 30 30 ao(dt) A B 26.32 (99) Rand/aO(dT) A B 26.16 (608) Rand/O(dT) A B 26.15 (607) 20 20 GSP B 25.06 (96) GSP GSP O(dT) O(dT) Rand Rand Rand/O(dT) Rand/aO(dT) ao(dt) ao(dt) Primer Primer Classification P = 0.2238 *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05).

Effect of Primer Classification on ΔCt 8 7 6 5 4 Primer Class Level* Mean (N) GSP A 3.81 (96) Rand/O(dT) B 3.19 (607) delta delta Ct Ct 3 2 1 0-1 -1-2 -2-3 -3-4 -4 GSP GSP O(dT) O(dT) Rand Rand Rand/O(dT) Rand/aO(dT) ao(dt) Primer Classification P < 0.0001 Rand/aO(dT) B 3.15 (608) O(dT) B C 2.97 (102) ao(dt) B C 2.90 (99) Rand C 2.83 (610) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05).

Effect of Reverse Transcriptase Replicate on Ct Ct 40 30 20 A B C RT Replicate P = 0.7626 RT Rep. Level* Mean (N) A A 26.42 (737) B A 26.39 (746) C A 26.24 (740) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05).

Effect of Reverse Transcriptase Replicate on ΔCt delta Ct 8 6 4 2 0-2 -4 A B C RT Replicate RT Replicate Level* Mean (N) C A 2.99 (740) A A 2.95 (740) B A 2.89 (746) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). P = 0.4703

Effect of qpcr Replicate on Ct Ct 40 30 20 1 2 qpcr Replicate qpcr Rep. Level* Mean (N) 1 A 26.4 (1,111) 2 A 26.3 (1,112) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). P = 0.7098

Effect of qpcr Replicate on ΔCt delta Ct 8 6 4 2 0-2 -4 1 2 qpcr Replicate qpcr Replicate Level* Mean (N) 2 A 2.96 (1,111) 1 A 2.93 (1,112) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). P = 0.6326

Effect of Set Up Method on Ct Ct 40 30 Set Up Method Level* Mean (N) Manual A 27.30 (1,307) 20 Manual Set up Method Robot P < 0.0001 Robot B 25.01 (916) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05).

Effect of Set Up Method on ΔCt delta Ct 8 6 4 2 0-2 -4 Manual Robot Set Up Method Level* Mean(N) Manual A 3.01 (1307) Robot B 2.86 (917) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). Set up Method P < 0.0287

Effect of Lab on Ct Ct 40 30 20 Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Site Lab Level* Mean (N) Lab A A 29.33 (132) Lab D A 28.59 (388) Lab E B 26.88 (391) Lab G B 26.81 (396) Lab F C 25.77 (396) Lab B D 24.27 (396) Lab C E 21.61 (124) P < 0.0001 *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05).

For Labs that Performed All Assays- Effect of Lab on Ct Ct 40 30 Lab Level* Mean (N) Lab D A 28.59 (388) Lab E B 26.88 (391) Lab G B 26.81 (396) Lab F C 25.77 (396) Lab B D 24.27 (396) 20 Lab B Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Site (All Assays) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). P < 0.0001

For Labs that Performed All Assays- Effect of Lab on ΔCt delta Ct 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0-1 -2-3 -4 Lab B Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Site (All Assays) Lab Level* Mean (N) Lab B A 4.40 (396) Lab E B 3.14 (391) Lab D B C 3.03 (388) Lab F C 2.88 (396) Lab G D 1.81 (396) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). P < 0.0001

Effect of Gene (Assay) on Ct Ct 40 30 Gene (Assay) Level* Mean (N) TBP A 30.90 (787) GUS B 28.41 (653) β-actin C 20.07 (773) 20 GUS TBP b-actin Gene *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). P < 0.0001

Effect of Gene (Assay) on ΔCt delta Ct 8 6 4 2 0-2 -4 GUS TBP b-actin Gene Gene (Assay) Level* Mean (N) GUS A 3.58 (653) TBP B 3.20 (787) β-actin C 2.16 (773) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). P < 0.0001

General Results There was a great variation in Ct and ΔCt between labs, though within lab variation between replicates was negligible The effect of RT biological replicates and qpcr replicates was not significant. The robotic set up gave significantly lower Ct and higher ΔCt values than manual set-up Assay Type (Gene) significantly affected Ct and ΔCt levels. The effects of primer or primer classification on Ct and ΔCt will be evaluated within each assay

β-actin hβ-actin 5 695 hβ-actin transcript bases 3 Total length - 1793 bases 71 bases 7 Stem Structures by m-fold

Amplification Plot for β-actin Randomers, Oligo(dT), aoligo(dt), Rand + O(dT), Rand + ao(dt) No Primer β-actin No Primer, No RT

Effect of Primer by Assay (β-actin) on Ct 26 25 24 23 22 Ct 21 20 19 18 12mer 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) 12mer/Oligo(dT) 15mer 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) 15mer/Oligo(dT) 18mer 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) 18mer/Oligo(dT) 21mer 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) 21mer/Oligo(dT) 6mer 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) 6mer/Oligo(dT) 9mer 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) 9mer/Oligo(dT) AnchOligo(dT) Oligo(dT) b-actin Primer Type P = 0.3768

Effect of Primer by Assay (β-actin) on Ct Primer Level* Mean 21mer A 20.35 (36) 15mer/Oligo(dT) A B 20.24 (35) 18mer A B 20.24 (35) Oligo(dT) A B 20.15 (36) AnchOligo(dT) A B 20.15 (35) 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) A B C 20.12 (36) 15mer A B C 20.08 (36) β-actin A B C 20.05 (36) 21mer/Oligo(dT) A B C 20.03 (36) 18mer/Oligo(dT) A B C 20.01 (34) 12mer/Oligo(dT) A B C 19.91 (36) 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) A B C 19.90 (35) 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) A B C 19.90 (36) 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) A B C 19.89 (36) 6mer/Oligo(dT) A B C 19.87 (36) 12mer B C 19.84 (36) 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C 19.80 (36) 9mer/Oligo(dT) B C 19.77 (35) 6mer B C 19.77 (36) 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C 19.74 (35) 9mer C 19.61 (35) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05)

Effect of Primer by Assay (β-actin) on Ct 26 25 24 23 22 Ct 21 20 19 18 12mer 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) 12mer/Oligo(dT) 15mer 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) 15mer/Oligo(dT) 18mer 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) 18mer/Oligo(dT) 21mer 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) 21mer/Oligo(dT) 6mer 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) 6mer/Oligo(dT) 9mer 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) 9mer/Oligo(dT) AnchOligo(dT) NoPrimer Oligo(dT) b-actin Primer P < 0.0001

Effect of Primer by Assay (β-actin) on Ct Level Mean (N) NoPrimer A 22.13 (36) 21mer B 20.35 (36) 15mer/Oligo(dT) B C 20.24 (35) 18mer B C 20.24 (35) Oligo(dT) B C 20.15 (36) AnchOligo(dT) B C 20.15 (35) 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D 20.12 (36) 15mer B C D 20.08 (36) β-actin B C D 20.05 (36) 21mer/Oligo(dT) B C D 20.03 (36) 18mer/Oligo(dT) B C D 20.01 (34) 12mer/Oligo(dT) B C D 19.91 (36) 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D 19.90 (35) 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D 19.90 (36) 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D 19.89 (36) 6mer/Oligo(dT) B C D 19.87 (36) 12mer C D 19.84 (36) 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) C D 19.80 (36) 9mer/Oligo(dT) C D 19.77 (35) 6mer C D 19.77 (36) 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) C D 19.74 (35) 9mer D 19.61 (35) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05)

Effect of Primer Classification by Assay (β-actin) on Ct Ct 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 GSP O(dT) Rand Rand/O(dT) Rand/aO(dT) ao(dt) Primer Classification P = 0.6815 Primer Class Level* Mean (N) O(dT) A 20.15 (36) ao(dt) A 20.15 (35) GSP (β-actin) A 20.05 (36) Rand A 19.98 (214) Rand/O(dT) A 19.97 (212) Rand/aO(dT) A 19.89 (214) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05).

Effect of Primer Classification by Assay (β-actin) on ΔCt delta Ct Ct 5 4 3 2 1 0-1 -1 Primer Class Level* Mean (N) Rand/aO(dT) A 2.34 (214) Rand/O(dT) A 2.26 (212) Rand A 2.25 (214) GSP (β-actin) A 2.19 (36) O(dT) A 2.09 (36) ao(dt) A 2.07 (35) -2-2 -3-3 -4-4 GSP O(dT) Rand Rand/O(dT) Rand/aO(dT) ao(dt) Primer Classification *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). P = 0.7669

β-glucuronidase (GUS) 344 5 bases hβ-glucuronidase transcript hβ-gus 3 Total length - 2245 bases 66 bases 3 Stem Structures by m-fold

Amplification Plot for GUS No Primer Randomers GUS, Oligo(dT), aoligo(dt), Rand + O(dT), Rand + ao(dt) No Primer, No RT

Effect of Primer by Assay (GUS) on Ct 40 Ct 30 12mer 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) 12mer/Oligo(dT) 15mer 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) 15mer/Oligo(dT) 18mer 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) 18mer/Oligo(dT) 21mer 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) 21mer/Oligo(dT) 6mer 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) 6mer/Oligo(dT) 9mer 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) 9mer/Oligo(dT) AnchOligo(dT) GUS NoPrimer Oligo(dT) Primer P < 0.0001

*Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05) Effect of Primer by Assay (GUS) on Ct Primer Level* Mean (N) NoPrimer A 31.81 (30) 21mer B 30.25 (30) 15mer B C 29.99 (30) 12mer B C D 29.44 (30) 6mer B C D E 29.04 (30) 18mer C D E F 28.81 (30) 9mer C D E F 28.67 (30) 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) D E F G 28.19 (30) 15mer/Oligo(dT) D E F G 28.17 (29) 12mer/Oligo(dT) E F G 28.09 (30) 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) E F G 28.06 (29) 18mer/Oligo(dT) E F G 27.96 (30) 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) E F G 27.96 (30) 9mer/Oligo(dT) E F G 27.82 (30) 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) E F G 27.81 (30) 6mer/Oligo(dT) E F G 27.79 (30) 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) F G 27.68 (29) 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) F G 27.63 (30) 21mer/Oligo(dT) F G 27.59 (30) AnchOligo(dT) F G 27.55 (29) Oligo(dT) F G 27.51 (30) GUS G 26.92 (27)

Effect of Primer by Assay (GUS) on ΔCt 7 6 5 4 3 2 delta Ct 1 0-1 -2-3 12mer 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) 12mer/Oligo(dT) 15mer 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) 15mer/Oligo(dT) 18mer 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) 18mer/Oligo(dT) 21mer 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) 21mer/Oligo(dT) 6mer 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) 6mer/Oligo(dT) 9mer 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) 9mer/Oligo(dT) AnchOligo(dT) GUS NoPrimer Oligo(dT) Primer P < 0.0001

Effect of Primer by Assay (GUS) on ΔCt Primer Level* Mean (N) GUS A 4.59 (27) Oligo(dT) A 4.52 (30) 21mer/Oligo(dT) A B 4.43 (30) 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) A B 4.41 (29) AnchOligo(dT) A B 4.32 (30) 12mer/AnchOligo(dT A B 4.29 (29) ) 6mer/Oligo(dT) A B 4.25 (30) 18mer/AnchOligo(dT A B 4.22 (30) ) 9mer/Oligo(dT) A B 4.22 (30) 21mer/AnchOligo(dT ) A B C 4.08 (30) 18mer/Oligo(dT) A B C 4.07 (30) 12mer/Oligo(dT) A B C D 3.94 (30) 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) A B C D 3.92 (29) 15mer/AnchOligo(dT A B C D 3.86 (30) ) 15mer/Oligo(dT) B C D E 3.70 (29) 9mer C D E F 3.36 (30) 18mer D E F 3.22 (30) 6mer E F 2.99 (30) 12mer F G 2.59 (30) 15mer G 2.04 (30) 21mer G 1.79 (30) NoPrimer H 0.22 (30) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05)

Effect of Primer Classification by Assay (GUS) on Ct Ct 40 40 30 30 GSP O(dT) Rand Rand/O(dT) Rand/aO(dT) ao(dt) Primer Classification P < 0.0001 Primer Class Level* Mean (N) Rand A 29.37 (180) Rand/O(dT) B 27.91 (179) Rand/aO(dT) B 27.89 (178) ao(dt) B 27.56 (29) O(dT) B 27.52 (30) GSP (GUS) B 26.93 (27) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05).

Effect of Primer Classification By Assay (GUS) on ΔCt delta Ct Ct 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0-1 -1-2 -2-3 -3 GSP O(dT) Rand Rand/O(dT) Rand/aO(dT) ao(dt) Primer Classification P < 0.0001 Primer Class Level* Mean (N) GSP (GUS) A 4.59 (27) O(dT) A 4.52 (30) ao(dt) A 4.32 (29) Rand/aO(dT) A 4.13 (178) Rand/O(dT) A 4.10 (179) Rand B 2.67 (180) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05).

TBP htata Binding Protein transcript 746 bases 5 htbp 3 Total length - 1867 bases 80 bases 8 Stem Structures by m-fold

Amplification Plot for TBP TBP Randomers, Oligo(dT), aoligo(dt), Rand + O(dT), Rand + ao(dt) No Primer

Effect of Primer by Assay (TBP) on Ct 40 Ct 30 12mer 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) 12mer/Oligo(dT) 15mer 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) 15mer/Oligo(dT) 18mer 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) 18mer/Oligo(dT) 21mer 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) 21mer/Oligo(dT) 6mer 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) 6mer/Oligo(dT) 9mer 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) 9mer/Oligo(dT) AnchOligo(dT) NoPrimer Oligo(dT) TBP Primer P < 0.0001

Effect of Primer by Assay (TBP) on Ct Primer Level* Mean (N) NoPrimer A 34.02 (35) Oligo(dT) B 31.56 (36) AnchOligo(dT) B C 31.48 (35) 21mer B C D 31.36 (36) 15mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D E 31.21 (36) 18mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D E F 31.17 (36) 18mer B C D E F 31.13 (36) 21mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D E F 31.13 (36) 21mer/Oligo(dT) B C D E F 31.10 (36) 15mer/Oligo(dT) B C D E F 31.02 (36) 18mer/Oligo(dT) B C D E F 31.00 (36) 12mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D E F 30.93 (36) 15mer B C D E F 30.81 (36) 12mer/Oligo(dT) B C D E F 30.76 (36) 9mer/AnchOligo(dT) B C D E F G 30.69 (36) 6mer/AnchOligo(dT) C D E F G 30.57 (36) 6mer/Oligo(dT) D E F G 30.48 (36) 12mer E F G 30.40 (36) 9mer/Oligo(dT) F G 30.30 (36) 9mer G H 29.82 (36) 6mer G H 29.80 (36) TBP H 28.99 (33) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05)

Effect of Primer Classification by Assay (TBP) on Ct Ct Ct 40 40 30 30 Primer Class Level* Mean (N) O(dT) A 31.55 (36) ao(dt) A B 31.48 (35) Rand/aO(dT) A B 30.95 (216) Rand/O(dT) B C 30.78 (216) Rand C 30.55 (216) GSP (TBP) D 28.99 (33) GSP O(dT) Rand Rand/O(dT) Rand/aO(dT) ao(dt) Primer Classification *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). P < 0.0001

Effect of Primer Classification by Assay (TBP) on ΔCt delta Ct Ct 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0-1 -1-2 -2-3 -3 GSP O(dT) Rand Rand/O(dT) Rand/aO(dT) ao(dt) Primer Classification Primer Class Level* Mean (N) GSP (TBP) A 4.95 (33) Rand B 3.56 (216) Rand/O(dT) C 3.34 (216) Rand/aO(dT) C 3.16 (216) O(dT) D 2.57 (36) ao(dt) D 2.55 (35) *Levels not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p<0.05). P < 0.0001

Results-By Assay β-actin There were not any significant differences between any of the primers or combinations in their ability to affect Ct or ΔCt levels GUS The effects of oligo (dt) and anchored oligo (dt) alone or in combination with a randomer on Ct or ΔCt were significant compared to the randomers alone TBP The effects of the gene specific primer, followed by the randomers alone or in combination on Ct or ΔCt were significant compared to the effects of oligo (dt) and anchored oligo (dt)

LOCATION? LOCATION? LOCATION?

Real-Time qpcr Assay Maps hβ-actin 5 695 hβ-actin transcript bases 3 Total length - 1793 bases 71 bases 7 Stem Structures by m-fold 344 5 bases hβ-glucuronidase transcript hβ-gus 3 Total length - 2245 bases 66 bases 3 Stem Structures by m-fold htata Binding Protein transcript 746 bases 5 htbp 3 Total length - 1867 bases 80 bases 8 Stem Structures by m-fold

Conclusions Self-priming in the RT reaction can result in the generation of cdna levels similar to those levels achieved when primers are added. The use of longer randomers (15-, 18-, and 21-mers) did not perform as well as the shorter randomers (6- and 9-mers) with respect to giving lower Ct values and higher ΔCt differences. Oligo (dt) or anchored oligo (dt) appear to be more effective primers than randomers when the assays are designed closer to the 3 end of the transcript. Oligo (dt) and anchored oligo (dt) appear to be equally as effective in generating cdna for use in qpcr

What is the Best Priming Strategy to Use to Generate cdna for Use in qpcr? The use of randomer-oligo (dt) or randomer-anchored oligo (dt) combinations in the RT reaction appear to give universally lower Ct values and higher ΔCt differences regardless of the assay location. If the cdna will be used for only 1 gene assay, the appropriate gene-specific primer may be a better choice.

Nucleic Acids Research Group Timothy C. Hunter (Co-Chair) Kevin L. Knudtson (Co-Chair) Deborah S. Grove Deborah J. Hollingshead Gregory L. Shipley Katia Sol-Church William L. Taylor Kathryn S. Lilley (EB liason) University of Vermont University of Iowa Penn State University University of Pittsburgh UTHSC- Houston A. I. dupont Hospital for Children UTHSC- Memphis Cambridge University http://www.abrf.org/narg

NARG Study: Part II Rationale: Allow users to benchmark their in-house RT protocol using provided RNA template and primers. Goal: To find an effective primer(s) that will provide optimal cdna synthesis for use in the broadest range of qpcr assays. Real-time qrt-pcr Community performs the Reverse Transcriptase (RT) Reaction Provided RNA Primers (6-mer, 9-mer, oligo (dt) 20, mixes, GSP Protocols Questionnaire/Survey Return cdna to the NARG for qpcr