Faten A Taki1, Baohong Zhang. 1. Department of Biology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, 27858, USA.
Abstract
RATIONAL: More research has recently been focused on multigenerational toxicogenomics impacts. Such studies rely on behavioral as well as genetic and epigenetic analyses using various biotechniques. Of these technologies, quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR is considered as a mature discovery and validation tool. Nevertheless, the interpretation of the resulting gene expression necessitates the establishment of reliable internal controls for normalization. No study has been performed to identify reliable reference genes in multigenerational settings. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim was to evaluate the stability of 16 reference gene candidates in Caenorhabditis elegans exposed to nicotine and their two subsequent generations for determining the most reliable reference genes for multigenerational study. METHODS: We exposed C. elegans to nicotine in the F0 generation and investigated the relative stabilities of 16 housekeeping genes in L4 larvae across three generations (F0, F1, and F2) using five statistical approaches (geNorm, ∆Ct method, NormFinder, BestKeeper, and RefFinder). RESULTS: geNorm shows that CDC-42 and Y45F10D.4 were the most stable reference genes. Based on NormFinder, TBA-1, EIF3.C, ARP-6, CDC-42, and MDH2 may serve as the top reliable reference genes. Comparative ∆Ct method ranked TBA-1, CDC-42, EIF3.C, ARP-6, and Y45F10D.4 as the most stable reference genes. BestKeeper shows that Y45F10D.4, F35G12.2, TBA-1, CDC-42, and CSQ-1were better reference genes. Overall, TBA-1, CDC-42, EIF3.C, ARP-6, and Y45F10D.4 were the most reliable reference genes for mutigenerational nicotine-exposed study. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 16 tested gene candidates, TBA-1 and CDC-42 were the two most stable reference genes for performing reliable gene expression normalization in the multigenerational impact of nicotine exposure.
RATIONAL: More research has recently been focused on multigenerational toxicogenomics impacts. Such studies rely on behavioral as well as genetic and epigenetic analyses using various biotechniques. Of these technologies, quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR is considered as a mature discovery and validation tool. Nevertheless, the interpretation of the resulting gene expression necessitates the establishment of reliable internal controls for normalization. No study has been performed to identify reliable reference genes in multigenerational settings. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim was to evaluate the stability of 16 reference gene candidates in Caenorhabditis elegans exposed to nicotine and their two subsequent generations for determining the most reliable reference genes for multigenerational study. METHODS: We exposed C. elegans to nicotine in the F0 generation and investigated the relative stabilities of 16 housekeeping genes in L4 larvae across three generations (F0, F1, and F2) using five statistical approaches (geNorm, ∆Ct method, NormFinder, BestKeeper, and RefFinder). RESULTS: geNorm shows that CDC-42 and Y45F10D.4 were the most stable reference genes. Based on NormFinder, TBA-1, EIF3.C, ARP-6, CDC-42, and MDH2 may serve as the top reliable reference genes. Comparative ∆Ct method ranked TBA-1, CDC-42, EIF3.C, ARP-6, and Y45F10D.4 as the most stable reference genes. BestKeeper shows that Y45F10D.4, F35G12.2, TBA-1, CDC-42, and CSQ-1were better reference genes. Overall, TBA-1, CDC-42, EIF3.C, ARP-6, and Y45F10D.4 were the most reliable reference genes for mutigenerational nicotine-exposed study. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 16 tested gene candidates, TBA-1 and CDC-42 were the two most stable reference genes for performing reliable gene expression normalization in the multigenerational impact of nicotine exposure.
Authors: Anna Git; Heidi Dvinge; Mali Salmon-Divon; Michelle Osborne; Claudia Kutter; James Hadfield; Paul Bertone; Carlos Caldas Journal: RNA Date: 2010-04-01 Impact factor: 4.942
Authors: Tomas Hruz; Markus Wyss; Mylene Docquier; Michael W Pfaffl; Sabine Masanetz; Lorenzo Borghi; Phebe Verbrugghe; Luba Kalaydjieva; Stefan Bleuler; Oliver Laule; Patrick Descombes; Wilhelm Gruissem; Philip Zimmermann Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2011-03-21 Impact factor: 3.969
Authors: Steve Lefever; Jan Hellemans; Filip Pattyn; Daniel R Przybylski; Chris Taylor; René Geurts; Andreas Untergasser; Jo Vandesompele Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2009-02-17 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Jo Vandesompele; Katleen De Preter; Filip Pattyn; Bruce Poppe; Nadine Van Roy; Anne De Paepe; Frank Speleman Journal: Genome Biol Date: 2002-06-18 Impact factor: 13.583
Authors: Joseph R Polli; Dorothy L Dobbins; Robert A Kobet; Mary A Farwell; Baohong Zhang; Myon-Hee Lee; Xiaoping Pan Journal: Neurotoxicology Date: 2014-12-19 Impact factor: 4.294