| Literature DB >> 26582541 |
Daniel Ramírez-Gordillo1, TuShun R Powers2, Jennifer C van Velkinburgh3, Casilda Trujillo-Provencio4, Faye Schilkey5, Elba E Serrano6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Auditory and vestibular disorders are prevalent sensory disabilities caused by genetic and environmental (noise, trauma, chemicals) factors that often damage mechanosensory hair cells of the inner ear. Development of treatments for inner ear disorders of hearing and balance relies on the use of animal models such as fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and non-human mammals. Here, we aimed to augment the utility of the genus Xenopus for uncovering genetic mechanisms essential for the maintenance of inner ear structure and function.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26582541 PMCID: PMC4652436 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-015-1485-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Expression analysis for OMIM® genes that aligned to X. tropicalis genome scaffolds and X. laevis PSIDs
| Category | Deafness | Vestibular | Both | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OMIM® genes | 229 | 53 | 70 | 352 |
|
| ||||
| OMIM® genes that mapped to | 204 | 51 | 67 | 322a |
| OMIM® genes that mapped to | 161 | 29 | 51 | 241 |
| Affymetrix Xl-PSIDs | ||||
| OMIM® genes that mapped to Xl-PSID genes that met alignment criteria | 154 | 40 | 40 | 234a |
| OMIM® genes that mapped to Xl-PSID genes that met alignment and expression criteria | 96 | 12 | 18 | 126b |
a190 OMIM genes met the alignment criteria for both technologies (see Fig. 2)
bThis group includes 18 OMIM® genes that were not detected by RNA-Seq
Fig. 2Comparison of Illumina-Solexa (RNA-Seq) and Affymetrix microarray methods for detection of Xenopus orthologues for OMIM® deafness and vestibular disorder genes. Bar graphs compare detection data for 131 deafness only OMIM® genes (a), 28 vestibular disorder only OMIM® genes (b), 31 OMIM® genes that are associated with both vestibular and deafness phenotypes (c) and all 190 OMIM® genes (d) that met alignment criteria for both microarray and RNA-Seq analysis. Both technologies met expression criteria for 108 (57 %) of the 190 OMIM® genes. RNA-Seq met expression criteria for 48 (25 %) additional OMIM® genes not detected by microarray. Eleven (6 %) genes were detected by microarray methods only. Expression criteria were not met with either technology for 23 (12 %) of the 190 Xenopus OMIM® orthologues that met alignment criteria
Fig. 1Experimental strategy for determining the expression of OMIM® orthologues for deafness and vestibular disorder genes in the Xenopus inner ear transcriptome with Illumina-Solexa (RNA-Seq) and Affymetrix microarray methods. A comprehensive list of OMIM® genes for deafness and vestibular genes was manually curated and used to map OMIM® sequences to the Xl-PSIDs on the Affymetrix GeneChip X. laevis Genome Array, and to the JGI Xenopus reference genome scaffolds. Xenopus inner ear RNA was used in microarray hybridization reactions with the Affymetrix GeneChip . The hybridization data were analyzed to retrieve intensity values from target Xl-PSIDs that had met alignment criteria for OMIM® orthologues for deafness and vestibular disorder genes. The Alpheus® program was implemented to map inner ear RNA-Seq reads to the JGI Xenopus reference genome scaffolds and the RNA-Seq alignment data were analyzed to retrieve target scaffold regions that had met alignment criteria for OMIM® orthologues for deafness and vestibular disorder genes. As part of the analysis, the data were separated into three OMIM® phenotype categories: deafness only; vestibular disorder only; and both deafness and vestibular disorder. When expression criteria were applied to both datasets, RNA-Seq methods detected expression of more OMIM® orthologues for deafness and vestibular disorder genes in the Xenopus inner ear (241) than were detected by microarray methods (126)
Fig. 3Correlation plot of Affymetrix microarray and Illumina-Solexa (RNA-Seq) measurements of OMIM® gene expression. Data (log2) from 108 Xenopus orthologues for OMIM® deafness and vestibular disorder genes that met expression criteria for both technologies are plotted in the figure (X-axis, microarray GCRMA intensity values; Y- axis, RNA-Seq read based intensity value). A modest correlation was detected between RNA-Seq reads and microarray intensity values in this analysis (R = 0.49, R2 = 0.24, P value <0.5)