Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
15
pubmed:dateCreated
2004-8-30
pubmed:abstractText
Microarray technology is extensively used in biological research. The applied technologies vary greatly between laboratories, and outstanding questions remain regarding the degree of correlation among approaches. Recently, there has been a drive toward ensuring high-quality microarray data by the implementation of MIAME (Minimal Information About a Microarray Experiment) guidelines and an emphasis on ensuring public-availability to all datasets. However, despite its current widespread use and availability, very little is known about the extent to which application of the different technologies influences the outcome of transcriptional profiles and differential expression. The results among the handful of published studies are conflicting. Here, we present a comprehensive evaluation encompassing different reporter systems (short oligonucleotides, long oligonucleotides and cDNAs), labelling techniques and hybridization protocols. We used four oligonucleotide and two cDNA platforms to compare gene expression between two sample types. We determined the overall consistency (reproducibility) within each platform, and correlation among replicates within and between technologies. We find that the top performing platforms show low levels of technical variability that result in an increased ability to detect differential expression. Most importantly, we show the top four platforms are highly correlated with biological, rather than technological, differences accounting for the majority of variation in the data.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-11071945, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-11283592, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-11309499, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-11917036, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-11934739, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-12000853, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-12194703, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-12377987, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-12540297, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-12568783, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-12900505, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-14500831, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-14551534, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-14556224, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-14633289, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-14645736, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-15161944, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/15333675-9915496
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:issn
1362-4962
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Electronic
pubmed:volume
32
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
e124
pubmed:dateRevised
2009-11-18
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2004
pubmed:articleTitle
Comprehensive comparison of six microarray technologies.
pubmed:affiliation
Mutagenesis Section, Environmental and Occupational Toxicology Division and Biostatistics and Epidemiology Division, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. carole_yauk@hc-sc.gc.ca
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Evaluation Studies