Science method

Quantitative RT-PCR - Science method

Explore the latest questions and answers in Quantitative RT-PCR, and find Quantitative RT-PCR experts.
Questions related to Quantitative RT-PCR
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
I am optimizing qPCR assay using a pooled cDNA sample. I have several target genes (100-200bp).
current template dilution: 1:30 (30x)
final primer concentrationn: 0.27 uM
annealing temp: 60C
extension temp: 72C
Ct values I get using this template dilution range from 32 to 35, which I think are too high (aren't they?). Increasing the template to 1:10 (10x) and decreasing the annealing temp close to primer Tm (55C) didn't do much.
All melt curves show single peaks at expected Tm. No problem with primer dimers and specificity.
Do you think I should increase the primer concentration to 0.5 uM to lower the Cts?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi,
Ct values in the range from 32 to 35 means very low expression of the target genes in your sample.
Initially, before multiplexing your samples, you need to spend some time running a few qPCRs just for optimizing the template concentration, primer concentration and annealing temperature.
If you are using a master mix, it will usually be 10x, and this is fixed, and you only need to tweak the other above mentioned factors. If you have followed GLP, aliquoted your master mix, stored at -20C and thawed the master mix on ice, then your Taq polymerase in the mix should be fine, and you rule out any issue with the mix.
What about the Ct value of the endogenous/housekeeping gene?
Try amplify a known tissue-specific gene as a positive control.
Since melt curves show single peaks, you can go ahead and increase the primer concentrations in 0.2μM or 0.5μM increments in an 8-well strip, and observe for any linear decrease in Ct values across wells.
If your sample is not limiting, see that you use at least have 10ng of cDNA template in each tube, during the initial optimization.
Above all else, see that your RNA template that you have used in the reverse transcription reaction was isolated efficiently and has a 260/280 ratio of ~2, indicating pure RNA. But for accurate quantitation it is best to use the Qubit fluorometer to calculate the amount of RNA template for RT rxn. Based on the conversion capacity of the RT kit you are using, the amount of RNA template will vary.
hope this helps.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
Hellow fellow academics
I am currently in a dilemma and I would really appreciate some suggestions/guidance on the matter.
Situation:
I have overexpressed my gene of interest (GOI) from wheat in Arabidopsis using the floral dip method and with strict screening on MS-Hygromycin, obtained my T3 transgenics. Now the problem is that while the selection, on the media has been successful, I am not able to get a band of my GOI on agarose gel after doing semi- RT-PCR. Initially, I thought that maybe my overexpression was unsuccessful so I took the T3 seeds to screen again on the media, but, the result was the same; the overexpression was successful and met the segregation ratio requirement of 100% germination. As this is my first time working with transgenics, please enlighten me on where I could be going wrong.
Please advise. Thank you for your time in advance.
Dee
Relevant answer
Answer
Ok, that helps a lot. So, if your GOI is controlled by the 35s promoter there are a few possible explanations for the lack of expression in your assay.
It is possible (but not common) for an overexpressed gene to be toxic and thus silenced by your plant.
It is likely that your expression assay is not working properly and could use more controls. Here is what I suggest.
1. genotype your T3 plants for the 35S:GOI fusion construct (F primer in 35S, R primer in GOI), this is standard end-point PCR on gDNA
2. use a housekeeping gene as a control for your RT assay (actin is a good choice) in general
3. re-try the RT of your GOI, use a kit for the RNA extraction, be sure to DNAse treat your RNA, and use oligo-dT for the cDNA synthesis reaction.
hope this helps!
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
Is there anyone who has done TaqMan assays using average regular use PCR mastermix (not the TaqMan assay specific mastermixe) using cDNA as template for the qPCR test? I wanted to know the ins and outs of the procedure and the optimization you did to get accurate results.
Thanks in advance.
Relevant answer
Answer
No, you cannot perform TaqMan assay using average regular use PCR master mix.
If you wish to perform PCR using the regular PCR mix, the assay is no longer called TaqMan Assay because the defining feature of a TaqMan Assay is the probe. This small piece of DNA matched to the DNA template being measured has two special molecules attached, a fluorescent reporter dye (R) and a quencher (Q). While both molecules are attached to the probe, the fluorescence of the dye is suppressed by the quencher. These probes bind to the template DNA after it has been denatured into single strands but before it has begun duplicating, making sure that all duplications of the template interact with the probe.
During the PCR reaction, Taq DNA polymerase extends the primer through the polymerase activity, as it approaches the probe it displaces the probe and cleaves it through the 5′ to 3′ exonuclease activity. This separates the reporter dye and the quencher dye from the probe, which results in increased fluorescence of the reporter. Accumulation of PCR products is detected in “real-time” directly by monitoring the increase in fluorescence of the reporter dye with an automated PCR system.
The assay which you would wish to perform is called two-step reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. In this assay, two enzymes are used namely, reverse transcriptase to produce single-stranded cDNA copies, which are then used as templates in an amplification reaction catalyzed by a thermostable DNA polymerase. This assay is the traditional method of RT-PCR in which the two synthetic reactions are performed separately and sequentially.
The TaqMan Assay is a real-Time PCR assay which detects the accumulation of amplicon during the reaction. The data is then measured at the exponential phase of the PCR reaction. The assay which you may plan to perform using average regular use PCR master mix is a type of conventional PCR using agarose gel which is not as precise as qPCR. By using the regular use PCR master mix, you cannot perform qPCR because for qPCR one requires the fluorescent reporter molecule such as fluorescent dye, a labeled oligonucleotide primer or probe such as (TaqMan Probe) for fluorescent detection which is monitored by the automated PCR system. Real-Time PCR makes quantitation of DNA and RNA easier and more precise than conventional PCR.
So, if you wish to use the average regular use PCR master mix, you need to perform the two-step reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and not qPCR.
Best.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
1 answer
I have an unusual question: I am working on a Erasmus internship project with Drosophila mutants at 2 different timepoints and with WT, KO and KI condition. A company analyzed the data using DESeq2 and I have only got loads of PDFs and the results_apeglm.xlsx file.
This contains: Transcripts per million for each gene, replicate and timepoint with the comparison for looking at DEGs - so I have a padj and log2FC value. A snippet is attached as an example.
I now want to construct a graph and clustering where genes that are going in changing directions between WT and KO over time become visible out of the hundreds of candidate DEGs. With this I want to narrow down the long list to make it verifiable with qPCR and serve as a marker for transformation from presymptomatic to symptomatic.
I am setting up my analysis in R and want to use the degPatterns() function from DEGReport, as it gives a nice visual output and clusters the genes for me.
How can I now transform my Excel sheets, to a matrix format that I can use with degPatterns()? The example with the Summarized Experiment given in the vignette is not really helpful to me, sadly.
Thank you all for reading, pondering and helping with my question! I would be very happy if there´s a way to solve my data wrangling issue.
All the best,
Paul
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi, what exactly do you need? A matrix from excel sheet. Then, simply read excel file using
as.matrix(readxl::read_excel(your_file_location))
function. You need to remove few columns and then matched the columns to meta data.
and IF degPatterns() function is not working properly, then you may need to clean and re-transform your data.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
2 answers
Trying to design my first set of methylated primers. Ran a temperature gradient and think I’ve narrowed down a functional range of annealing temperatures across primer concentrations.
Now, I wanted to finally test efficiency across a few annealing more select temperatures. However, I’m realizing that in my labs qPCR protocols, most of them don’t carry an extension step, only the annealing and denature step.
My understanding is that since the templates and products are small (100bp) the copy is usually completed during the ramp up to the denature step. I’ll add that my Tms are approximately 64C, and my estimated annealing is consequently in the 55-61C range. We are using IQ sybr green super mix (iTAQ polymerase).
Just wanted to inquire if this was indeed the case, and if I should rerun my temperature gradient with an added extension step or just proceed with piloting.
On an agarose gel, I didn’t see any double banding across temperatures (suggesting high primer specificity?) albeit brighter bands were detected at specific temperatures, within 2C-6C of the Tm, so I wanted to run sample dilutions across a few degrees to maximize efficiency.
thanks for any help!
Relevant answer
Answer
Efficient amplification of such short products does not need any extension time; it also needs no annealing time and no denaturing time (some denaturing time is needed for efficient separation of high-molecular template DNA during the first few cycles to avoid excessive re-annealing).
The critical part is just to actually reach the target temperatures in the whole volume of your PCR. If the volume is small, waiting for more than a few seconds is simply a waste of time. In rapid-cycle PCR, where the surface-to-volume ratio of the reaction tubes is typically large and the instrument allows steep heating and cooling rates, no waiting time at all is required in any step. In my personal experience, shorter cycling times typically increased the specificity of the amplification, too.
Adding to Pauls excellent answer I'd like to recommend using a 10-15% PAGE which separates these short products and primer dimers well:
4.5 % (w/v) Acrylamide
0.5 % (w/v) Bisacrylamide
0.08 % (w/v) APS
0.2 % (v/v) TEMED
in (1x)-TPE-Buffer
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
6 answers
Hi ResearchGate community,
I have been trying to learn more about the optical differences between block-based real-time PCR machines like ABI StepOne versus rotor-based machines such as MIC or RotorGene systems.
I understand that some systems rely on ROX as a passive reference dye while others state that it is optional to incorporate it and others do not need such a factor at all.
My question is if you add this fluorescent dye to your master mix, would it interfere with the detection when it is being amplified using one of the systems that do not need such normalization?
Highly appreciate any insight in this regard.
Best,
Negar
Relevant answer
Answer
Thomas Guiraud Fabulous Thomas,
Many thanks for your kind support.
Guess I am beginning to get a more clear view of it all as I keep experimenting.
Best wishes for all you do,
Negar
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
2 answers
Hello, I am working on microRNA expression studies on Regeneration. I isolated RNA from my sample and converted it into cDNA using Poly A polymerase and Reverse transcriptase enzyme. Previously I designed a miRNA-specific Forward primer at the melting temperature of 60°C. For Reverse primer, I used Universal Reverse primer from a commercial kit. But now I need to design a miRNA reverse primer for myself. Kindly suggest me method to design a reverse primer for Poly A-tailed miRNA. Thanks in advance.
Relevant answer
Answer
As it is a poly-A that means the end of your sequence is several A codons in a row. Therefore your reverse primer needs to be poly-T.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
Is it possible that the amplification failure products can be visualized in electrophoresis? Due to the failed amplification results it shows bands in my electrophoresis with bands that are quite clear. My amplification curve clearly shows amplification failure, but when I look back at it with electrophoresis there are some obvious bands, how is that possible?
Relevant answer
Answer
I think this band is because of the primer bind with itself we call it dimer
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
Hi everyone. I have searched all around the internet and literature for the answer to this question but haven’t been able to find any info regarding my specific situation.
I have multiple experiments consisting of qPCR data but can’t figure out how to best analyse it. I have WT and KO cells which I apply 3 treatments to and I have a control (no treatment) for both genotypes, and I check 15 genes. What I really want to show is if the genes are up/downregulated when I add a treatment in ko vs wt, so I want to make my comparison between the genotypes. But I can’t compare them directly, because at baseline they have quite different expression levels already, so I want to take the control for each into consideration. Before I was plotting -Dct (normalised to housekeeping gene only) and would compare each treatment in each genotype to its own control. But my group didn’t like this, which I understand, because the graphs are cluttered and I don’t show the comparison I’m really trying to make. I worked with a bioinformatician with my idea to normalise the Dct for each genotype/treatment to its own control and in that way make DDct, and then I compare the -DDct between genotypes for each treatment using an unpaired t-test. I don’t do fold change. These graphs are much nicer to look at, but my supervisor says it doesn’t make statistical sense this way, and wants to keep the graphs the original way.
can anyone help me out? What is the best way to analyse and graph my data?
Relevant answer
Answer
Ensuring that your data analysis and visualization methods are scientifically ⁠ valid and effectively convey the information is crucial. Here's a suggestion for a statistical analysis ⁠ that might better suit your needs: ⁠
Relative Expression Analysis: ​
Instead of using -Dct or -DDct, Take into account ⁠ utilizing the approach referred to as 'Relative Expression'. The fold change in gene expression between treated samples and their ⁠ corresponding controls is calculated within each genotype using this method. This way, you'll be comparing the change in expression ⁠ due to treatment in both genotypes separately. ‌
Relative Expression (RE) = 2^(-Dct) [where Dct ⁠ = Ct(target gene) - Ct(housekeeping gene)] ​
Fold Change Calculation: ‍
Calculate the fold change for each gene between treated samples and their controls ⁠ within each genotype using the relative expression values obtained in step 1. ‍
Fold Change Division of RE(treatment) by ⁠ RE(control) RE(treatment) / RE(control) ​
Comparison Between Genotypes: ‍
Having the fold change values for each gene within both genotypes, examine and contrast the fold changes between KO and WT genotypes across all treatments An adequate statistical test ⁠ can be employed to perform this task, like employing either an unpaired t-test or a non-parametric alternative when the data doesn't satisfy the assumptions of a t-test. ‌
Graphical Representation: ‌
Your data can be visually represented using bar graphs, Displaying the fold change ⁠ in gene expression for each treatment in both KO and WT cells. Visualizing the relative variations in gene expression among ⁠ the genotypes post-treatment is facilitated by this. ‍
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
13 answers
Is it necessary to measure the quantity of single-strand cDNA after RT-PCR and before qPCR? TaqMan Universal PCR Master Mix manual (TaqMan Gene Expression Assay) (at picture) describes the desired quantity of template (1-100 ng) per reaction. So, I should measure the quantity of cDNA after RT-PCR (for instance, on Nanodrop spectrophotometer) and bring this amount to the desired range if needed?
Relevant answer
Answer
Use the same _amount_ of RNA in each reaction, wherever possible. Don't dilute your RNA prior to the reaction, there's no point. Dilute it as part of the reaction (i.e. add X ul RNA + Y ul H2O).
A lot depends on the max vol your kit can take, but if I know that I can use say...8ul of RNA total, and most of my RNAs are 200ng.ul-1 or above, I'll use '1600ng' as my target. If any of my RNA is less than 200ng.ul-1 (so I can't physically add 1600ng without exceeding the 8ul cap), I'll just add 8ul.
Most kits can take anything up to about 2ug, so that's your upper limit. 1ug would be fine, for example.
Once you've made your cDNA, dilute all of it to the same extent (1/10 dilution for everything). Definitely dilute it, though.
You're not just diluting out the target molecule population, you're also diluting out the cDNA synthesis buffer components so they don't interfere with your PCR reaction.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
Hello, I have a probable inhibition problem with q-PCR.
Always starting from the same RNA extraction, I synthesized the cDNA in two different ways. In both cases, I used the ImProm-II Reverse Transcriptase kit (promega).
For the first synthesis I treated the RNA with the TURBO DNA-free™ kit (Ambion).
The second time using the promega RQ1 RNase-freeDNase kit, because in the laboratory where I work now they mainly use this kit.
I noticed that in the qPCR done using RQ1 treated cDNA the gene expression values ​​are significantly lower. While using the cDNA treated with the turbo DNA free kit everything was fine. These results are confirmed because I have access to the DEGs information of the two tested samples.
the main difference between the two kits is that the ambion kit allows the reagents elimination, while the promega kit does not.
Do you think it is possible that there is inhibition caused by the DNase kit? or could the problem be something else?
I did several tests with different dilutions and amount of cDNA. Diluting it improves the results but I don't achieve the expected results.
Thanks to anyone who can give me some advice
Relevant answer
Answer
Yes, cDNA synthesis buffer can be inhibitory. Yes, you should always dilute your cDNA.
Typically, neat cDNA gives unexpectedly poor results both because of the inhibitory effects of the buffer, but also because a massively overcrowded PCR (target in excess of primers) isn't actually that efficient.
If you run a dilution series with your cDNA, you'll usually see high Cqs for neat, which then jump to markedly lower values following a ~10-fold dilution, and then subsequent 10-fold dilutions just increase the Cq by ~3.32 cycles, indicating that all these values are within the quantifiable range. At very high dilutions, where Cqs get to 30+, you'll see greater variation between replicates (stochastic partitioning range: with ~10 molecules per ul, you can get wells with...say: 6, 12, and 8 molecules each, respectively).
You should ideally do this with every target, but you should definitely do it with each different kit: it's very important to establish the point at which cDNA synth buffer is no longer inhibitory.
10 or 20-fold dilution is a good starting point, but I would always dilute cDNA at least 1/5.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
5 answers
I have a group of five patients who were tested for expression of 11 genes using qPCR. Each of these patients have a different deletion size, and so my aim is to check the differences in expression levels for the presence versus absence of each of these genes. I calculated their 2^-ddCt values (relative fold change). What I want to do is get an average fold change when a particular gene is present or absent, collectively in this group of five patients. I want this change in logarithmic terms, in order for the up- and down-regulation to be represented equally.
My question is: Say, I want to get an average fold change in expression, for example upregulation, for a gene X. Should I take log base 10 of the average for all 2^-ddCt in the patients showing upregulation? Or should I take log base 10 of individual 2^-ddCt values showing upregulation and then take average?
Thank you!
Relevant answer
Answer
Calculate the log2 fold change for each gene. The log2 fold change is calculated as the logarithm (base 2) of the ratio of the expression values between two conditions.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
Hi all , I am confirming gene expression using RT-PCR. If a gene is down-regulated does that mean it is not expressed in the strain?
Relevant answer
Answer
Yes, that’s correct. When a gene is down-regulated, it means that the expression of the gene is decreased. However, it does not mean that the gene is not being expressed at all. The product it encodes for is also decreased as a result of the decreased expression of the gene
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
2 answers
I have two types of template (RNA) derived from two different types of tissue (normal and tumor). Which one I should add to well with endogenous control primers/probe (GAPDH) at qPCR plate? I know that there is no difference because it is a control gene (it is suggested that its expression will be equal in both types of tissue, but, nevertheless, I would like to know which source of template is usually used in this case (template from normal or tumor sample)? And, additionally, should I make all templates' concentrations equally (in every well at plate) before start of qPCR (TaqMan Gene Expression Assay)?
Relevant answer
Answer
The "endogenous control" is used to calibrate against RNA isolation efficiency and sample loading differences between your samples, so you need it in each of your samples. It's not to *show* that the expression of that gene is equal in all samples - the assumption of equal expression is *used* to allow that calibration.
Also note that (1) using a single control is not state of the art and prone to errors and bias, and that (2) GAPDH is known to be regulated under oxidative stress (hypoxia) and that hypoxia is a often a key feature in the development of tumors (hence GAPDH might *not* be a valid control).
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
I am trying to design a primer for a specific gene and the Tm is coming near to 60 degrees when I select a minimum of 30-35 bp, for forward as well as for reverse primer. As the template is too long I think it might lead to non-specific binding, what are the possible solutions for this problem? I am using Snapgene to design primers for cloning
Relevant answer
Answer
1. Adjust primer length: Increase or decrease primer length slightly.
2. Evaluate Tm prediction methods: Use different algorithms or tools for Tm calculation.
3. Adjust primer sequence: Make small modifications to fine-tune Tm.
4. Check for secondary structures: Identify and minimize hairpins or self-complementarity.
5. Consider primer placement: Avoid repetitive or variable regions.
6. Follow primer design guidelines: Adhere to established recommendations.
7. Validate and test primers experimentally.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
I am doing absolute quantification RT-qPCR for the beta actin gene. I start with RNA, turn this into cDNA and use that for qPCR. I am going to get a custom oligo of the PCR amplification product to use for making the standard required for absolute quantification.
This is how I got the sequence for the custom oligo. First, I input my primers into this website: http://www.bioinformatics.org/sms2/pcr_products.html along with the mRNA sequence for beta actin. The website gave me the amplified product, which is 61 bp as expected.
My question is should I use this result sequence as my oligo, or should I reverse complement it? I am wondering this because I input the mRNA sequence into the website to get the amplicon, but I am using cDNA which would be the complementary sequence. Please let me know. Thank you
Relevant answer
Answer
Can you get the synthetic oligo as a double-stranded molecule? Single-stranded molecules will not work as a standard.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
6 answers
Based on the Rt-PCR analysis results of the oligos I have designed, it appears that there is a consistent signal from the NTC and negative patient samples with Ct values ranging from 30 to 32. However, I have noticed that in the positive patient samples, the signal sometimes resembles that of the NTC and sometimes it does not. I am curious about the possible reasons for these false positives in the NTC and false negatives in the positive samples. Could this be attributed to a faulty probe or potentially caused by dimerization?
Relevant answer
Answer
Julie Ann Dougherty No, unfortunately, I have no information about the contents of the other kit. Thank you very much for your answers :)
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
2 answers
Sometimes, I have a high fluorescence baseline (see attached png file). Any suggestions?
Relevant answer
Answer
Kindly use automatic baseline opition, if you have then you can set it manually and that may be helpful.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
I've done a qPCR reaction using Bio-Rad CFX Duet, 10 ul reaction, using EvaGreen dye.
as you can see, image 01 is what I think as a good amplification plot.
Today I do the qPCR again using a home-made qPCR master mix (also using Taq Polymerase produced in our lab).
Here is the recipe for it:
20 mM Tris.Cl pH 8.0
10 mM (NH4)2SO4
10 mM KCl
2 mM MgSO4
0.1% Triton X-100
200 uM dNTPs
1X EvaGreen
300 ng of Taq Polymerase (in 10% Glycerol, 25 mM Tris.Cl pH 8.0, and 500 mM Imidazole)
5% Glycerol
a week ago I using the same recipe for the assay, but it show great amplification plot
but today, it show amplification plot like image 04 (sorry i haven't moved the data yet so i just using Paint to show what the amplification plot looks like)
what can cause the weird shape of it?
Relevant answer
Answer
Jonathan Jonathan god damn PCR inhibitors... :-D
Thanks for the Taq info !
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
I have quantified plasma protein (ELISA) and mRNA (whole blood; RT-PCR) for a candidate molecule. Independently, a comparison of plasma levels between 2 groups shows a significant difference; whereas, comparison of dCt is not statistically significant. Also, dCt vs conc ng/ul shows a negative correlation.
1. Should I compare dCt between the two groups or rely on fold-change to assess whether my molecule is expressed in the case group vs the control group?
2. How do I justify the negative correlation obtained while comparing plasma protein levels vs whole blood mRNA levels in the same set of patients?
Relevant answer
Answer
Important: correlate dCt values to log conc.
Also be aware about how you calculated dCt. If you subtract the REF Ct from the GOI Ct (some people strangely do this), then higher dCt values indicate lower GOI expression (assuming REF expression is constant)!
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
Target: SYBER
Relevant answer
Dear Soufiane Rabbaa
Add a non template control (NTC) in one PCR vial and test it.
A non template control is leaving the sample without cDNA. Usually NTC is used to check whether your cDNA is contaminated or to check primer-dimer formation. Here you can use the NTC to rule out which parameter (template quality, primer,reagents,dye) is to be rectified and troubleshooted.
All the best
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
5 answers
Hi all,
I desperately need your help and advice. Based on the TCGA data analysis that i have done, i would like to validate the expression of two miRNAs in my own ffpe samples. I am comparing these miRNA expressions in samples with high vs low macrophage density.
Let's say the miRs are miR-A and miR-B. I would like to compare the expression difference in breast cancer tissue samples with high macrophage density vs low. The hypothesis is that samples with high macrophage density would have high expression of miR-A, but low expression of miR-B, and vice versa.
The question is, how do i calculate the miR expression? I am using U6 as my HKG. I do not have a reference sample nor do I have treated vs untreated samples. Most calculations i see involve these two. I am merely comparing the expression pattern between samples with high macs vs low. Also, what statistical method shall i use for this analysis?
Relevant answer
Answer
People attach entirely unnecessary value to specific methods, often to the point where they forget what the data actually is.
You don't need a calibrator. It adds nothing here.
Your questions are "Does miR-A go up with macrophage content" and "does miR-B go down with macrophage content"
You can measure miR-A and miR-B in (hopefully) multiple samples that you have designated "high macrophage" and "low macrophage". You can also measure U6 in those samples, and you assume U6 will not change with macrophage content.
Now you normalise miR expression to U6 expression (miR-A - U6, miR-B - U6) for EACH sample: these are your dCt values for miR-A and miR-B, in each sample, and represent the normalised expression of those miRs within those samples.
These are your numbers, though they are on an inverted log scale, so smaller numbers = higher expression.
Multiply all numbers by -1 to make it more intuitive.
Now these are your numbers on a log scale (which is where you want them, because qPCR data is normally distributed when left as log scale).
Are all the miR-A numbers in high macrophage samples bigger than those in the low macrophage samples? Is the reverse true for miR-B?
Those are your questions, and you now have the numbers to answer them.
What would a calibrator do here? The question you are asking is "is this set of numbers different from this other set of numbers", and that isn't a question that needs anything to be "calibrated to 1". The numbers themselves are entirely arbitrary, and if you used a different reference gene, might all be completely different, but the relationship between those numbers should stay the same.
-dCt values of 2, 3, 2 vs -1, -1, -2 : that's a significant difference.
If you add 5 to all the values such that you now have 7, 8, 7 vs 4, 4, 3, it's still a significant difference (it's exactly the same significance value, too).
It's the relationship between the numbers you are testing, not the numbers themselves.
Also note, the mean difference between the two sets IS your fold change, on a log2 scale. For the numbers above, it's 3.666 (in both cases), corresponding to a ~10-fold difference. I'm using -dCt values here, so the first set is higher expression: the first set has ~10x as much expression as the second set.
I don't think you need to explicitly describe this process at all: you have Ct values, you used your reference to obtain dCt values (normalised data), you then tested that. That's statistically valid and entirely appropriate here.
What MIGHT be useful is to include (in your manuscript) a ballpark figure for the raw Cq values, because a major issue with normalising qPCR data is that all abundance information is discarded.
If you had the data above, and presented that, showing a ~10-fold difference in expression, but also noted that "Cq values for the second set of samples were ~28-30", this tells the reader (and you) that what you're looking at here is low expression becoming effectively "no expression" (Cqs in the 30s are near the limit of detection, and are unlikely to be of biological relevance).
If instead you said "Cq values for the second set of samples were ~20-22", this represents MUCH more abundant expression, so here biological mechanism is "loads of expression" becoming "slightly less expression", with concomitant effects on how you interpret these changes.
In essence, the difference between the two sets of numbers is what you're finding out. The approximate Cq values of your GOI gives you rough idea of abundance. The combination of these two allows you to make biological inferences.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
2 answers
Hello there, I would like to correlate the mRNA expression of a gene obtained from patient blood samples with surrogate parameters like HbA1c and data like body weight, age, etc. However, I am unsure and confused about the correct way to do it. I did not find a solution on the web so far.
Which qPCR-data should you I use (dCT, ddCT, 2^-ddCT)?
If it favorable to use log-transformed data, or does it distort the results?
Is it statistically correct to simply use an xy-graph and do a correlation analysis?
Regards!
Relevant answer
Answer
To correctly correlate qPCR data with patient characteristics, you can follow these steps:
  1. Collect and preprocess data: Gather qPCR data from your experiments, including the gene expression levels for each patient sample. Also, collect the relevant patient characteristics, such as age, gender, disease status, treatment, or any other factors of interest. Ensure that the data is properly labeled and organized.
  2. Data exploration: Perform exploratory data analysis (EDA) to understand the distribution of your qPCR data and patient characteristics. Use summary statistics, histograms, box plots, or scatter plots to visualize the data and identify any outliers or patterns.
  3. Data integration: Merge or join your qPCR data and patient characteristics data based on a common identifier, such as patient ID. This will create a combined dataset that includes both the qPCR measurements and the corresponding patient information.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
We are trying to analyse differential expression of cell free mRNA (which is totally free on the blood) on blood samples of breast cancer patients. I need articles to use as references. Thanks!
Relevant answer
Answer
According to a study published on PubMed, the identification of the best reference gene is a critical step to evaluate the relative change in mRNA expression of a target gene by RT-qPCR. In this work, nineteen genes of different functional classes were evaluated using Real Time Human Reference Gene Panel (Roche Applied Sciences), to identify the best housekeeping genes for qPCR analysis.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
I am performing qPCR on drosophila mtDNA. Because of the nature of my work, I use two separate primer sets. With one of them, the qPCR works as expected - good amplification with mtDNA and nothing/ very high Cq primer-dimers in NTCs.
With my second set of primers, I continually get amplification in the NTCs that is at about the same amplitude as the template samples, and have identical melt curves. I have tried using new primers, new readymix, and new water. I have also bought new primer stock, but still have this issue. I have used these primers in PCR and they have worked fine when verified with gels (PCRs are without the readymix, that is the only difference - I make up my own solution).
Because the first primers work fine, it seems like it doesn't seem to be a technical/environmental issue, or contamination of the water or mastermix. The only difference is the primers which I initially thought may have been contaminated, but given new stock solution yields the same results and PCR without the readymix is also fine, that does not seem to be the case.
Is it a thing for primers to be incompatible with certain readymixes? If so, why is that? I haven't found any explanations in my searches.
Relevant answer
Answer
The presence of amplification in your no template controls (NTCs) can be attributed to several factors. Let's consider a few possibilities in your specific case:
  1. Primer-dimer formation: Primer-dimers are non-specific products formed by the interaction of forward and reverse primers in the absence of a target DNA template. These primer-dimers can lead to false-positive amplification in NTCs. It's important to ensure that the primers do not have complementary regions that can anneal to each other.
  2. Contamination: Despite your efforts to rule out contamination, it is still worth considering the possibility. Contamination can arise from various sources, such as cross-contamination during pipetting, contamination of reagents, or carryover from previous reactions. Ensure proper handling techniques, use separate workspaces for PCR setup, and regularly change gloves and pipette tips to minimize the risk of contamination.
  3. Primer specificity: While your primers may work well in regular PCR and produce the expected product on gels, it's possible that they have non-specific binding sites in the NTCs under the qPCR conditions. The increased sensitivity of qPCR can sometimes reveal non-specific amplification that may not be apparent in conventional PCR. It could be helpful to design new primers or evaluate alternative primer sets to see if the issue persists.
  4. Incompatibility with the readymix: It is indeed possible for primers to be incompatible with certain qPCR readymixes. Different readymix formulations may have varying buffer compositions, enzyme concentrations, or other additives that can affect primer performance. Compatibility issues can arise due to differences in optimal annealing temperatures or primer efficiencies between primer sets and readymix formulations.
To address this issue, you can try the following steps:
  • Test your second set of primers with a different qPCR readymix from a different manufacturer to see if the amplification in NTCs persists.
  • Consider optimizing the qPCR conditions for your second primer set, such as adjusting annealing temperature, primer concentration, or reaction components, to minimize non-specific amplification.
  • Consult with colleagues or experts in the field who have experience with qPCR on drosophila mtDNA to gather insights or potential solutions specific to your experimental system.
It's worth noting that troubleshooting such issues often requires a combination of experimental testing, careful optimization, and expertise in qPCR assay design and interpretation.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
Dear all,
I am currently trying to determine the number of archaea present in an ecosystem with the 16S rRNA gene.
I am normalizing the mcrA gene with the total archaea 16S rRNA gene. The mcrA gene measures the methanogenic acivity.
The problem that I am currently facing is that some archaea have multiple 16S rRNA genes, which makes it difficult to normalize to the mcrA gene.
Does anyone know how to solve this problem?
Thanks in advance!
Relevant answer
Answer
If this is being done by QPCR you can use an average 16S rRNA gene copy number for all known archaeal genomes and divide your total archaea QPCR 16S count by this number. This average 16S operon/archaea genome is routinely updated as new genomes are sequenced can be found at the following database. https://rrndb.umms.med.umich.edu/ Current average = 1.7 operons/genome
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
does anyone know why there is an air gap at the end of the pipette tip every now and then after aspirating? it seems to occur more often when pipetting larger volumes on a P1000 but can also occur when say using a multichannel pipette on lower volumetric pipettes. pardon the poor paint image to depict what im trying to get across
is this a operator error or is it natural to occur? if an operator error, are there any tips to avoid this?
Relevant answer
Answer
Usually is caused by capillary action. Some brands of pipette tips are more prone to it than others. Other causes can be the viscosity of the fluid being pipetted is preventing the tip from fully filling in the time you have it submerged so the remainder is filling with air when you remove the tip. If this is a consistent problem, do not use them for qPCR.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
1 answer
I have IgG-secreting hybridoma cell lines, and I am trying to knock out a gene in these cell lines. I tried K/D but, each time I get a very low RNA yield (to assess using qPCR) and K/D is unsuccessful.
Relevant answer
Answer
Performing siRNA transfection in hybridoma cells can be challenging due to their unique characteristics and sensitivity to transfection methods. Here are some considerations and tips to improve siRNA transfection efficiency in hybridoma cells:
  1. Transfection reagents: Use transfection reagents specifically optimized for siRNA delivery. Lipid-based transfection reagents such as Lipofectamine RNAiMAX or jetPRIME are commonly used for siRNA transfection. Test different reagents to find the one that works best for your hybridoma cell line.
  2. Optimization of transfection conditions: Optimize the transfection conditions, including siRNA concentration, transfection reagent-to-siRNA ratio, and transfection time. Titrate the siRNA concentration and transfection reagent amount to find the optimal conditions that provide efficient transfection while minimizing cell toxicity.
  3. Serum-free media: Hybridoma cells can be sensitive to serum components, which may interfere with transfection efficiency. Consider using serum-free or low-serum media during transfection to minimize any potential inhibitory effects.
  4. Cell density: Maintain the appropriate cell density for transfection. Hybridoma cells should be in the logarithmic growth phase and at the recommended cell density to achieve optimal transfection efficiency.
  5. Pre-incubation with siRNA: Some hybridoma cell lines benefit from a pre-incubation step, where siRNA and transfection reagent are mixed and incubated together before adding them to the cells. This allows the formation of transfection complexes and enhances siRNA delivery.
  6. Optimization of transfection time: Hybridoma cells may require different transfection times compared to other cell lines. Optimize the transfection time to ensure sufficient uptake and efficient gene knockdown without significant cell toxicity.
  7. Cell viability assessment: Determine the optimal transfection conditions by assessing cell viability after transfection. Use viability assays like trypan blue exclusion or ATP-based assays to evaluate the impact of transfection on cell survival.
  8. Delivery enhancers: In some cases, the use of delivery enhancers such as electroporation or nucleofection may improve siRNA delivery into hybridoma cells. These methods can be more efficient but require specialized equipment and protocols.
Remember that each cell line is unique, and optimization of transfection conditions may require some trial and error. It is crucial to validate the knockdown efficiency by assessing gene expression using qPCR or other appropriate methods.
If siRNA transfection still proves challenging, alternative gene knockdown strategies like CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing or lentiviral-based shRNA delivery systems can be considered. These approaches may offer more stable and robust gene knockdown in hybridoma cells.
Consulting the literature or seeking advice from experts experienced in working with hybridoma cells may also provide valuable insights and specific tips for successful siRNA transfection in your hybridoma cell line.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
Hello everyone,
I am trying to determine relative expression values for specific genes in different life-stages of my organisms (adult, larval, and microfilaria). For each of the three life-stages, I have three biological replicates and performed all PCRs in triplicate. I have two reference genes to compare with my genes of interest, but I am unsure how to calculate fold expression changes if there are no treatment groups/control groups with the ΔΔCt method since I am only assessing life-stage differences in expression. Also, with two reference genes, I am unsure at which point in the analysis I need to account for this.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
Relevant answer
Answer
For multiple references genes, you calculate either the arithmetic mean (for Cq values) or the geometric mean (for linearised relative quantities). This is because Cq values are approximately normally distributed, whereas linearised RQ values are lognormal.
Also, well done for using two references: this is very good practice.
For your actual data, you don't actually need to calculate absolute values (and indeed absolute values won't necessarily tell you much more than relative values + "rough eyeballing of the raw Cq" will): what you're interested in is the difference in expression between your different life stages, and this is an entirely relative comparison. You could, in essence, pick a single life stage (any life stage) as your "control" and then relate all your other life stages to that.
So, here's a basic workflow: you have one GOI and two REF for larval, microfilaria and adult, with three biological replicates in each, PCR'd in triplicate.
  • Calculate the mean Cq values per gene, per sample (i.e. the average of your triplicate reactions). Look for any outliers and discard accordingly (this is why you do this in triplicate: it's not uncommon to get "22.3, 25.4, 25.3" or similar, and the approach is generally just that "assume the 22.3 is a well where something went weird, so discard")
  • Calculate the per-sample mean REF Cq, which can be arithmetic, since you're in log space (where PCR data is normally distributed): so for adult #1, that's 0.5*( adult#1 REF1 Cq + adult#1 REF2 Cq). This is your "normalisation factor" (NF) for that sample. At this point it's worth looking at your NF values for your dataset as a whole and confirming that they're pretty consistent: anything with very low or very high NFs might be outliers, and any consistent deviation (i..e "larval NFs are always 3 cycles higher") is a sign your references are not good references.
  • Calculate the per-sample normalized GOI expression (adult#1 GOI Cq - adult#1 NF). These are your dCt values, and...honestly, this is where you can stop. All your comparisons will be between dCt values, so you don't actually need to do any more data manipulation. You can, if you wish, invert everything (flip the sign, so 3.4 becomes -3.4) because for dCt low values indicate high expression, while "high values = high expression" is more intuitive. Just put "-dCt" on the Y axis.
  • Note that it is very good practice to present qPCR data like this (i.e. in log space) because here changes both up and down (10 fold up, 10 fold down, etc) will be given equal apparent weighting in your plots.
  • Additional changes: if you want to standardise your data such that one of your groups is distributed around "0", you can do that. It won't actually change any of your data, because it will be an en bloc transformation. For this (since you're still in log space), you determine the arithmetic mean of whichever group you want as your 'reference' and then just subtract that mean from all data (usually your would invert your data first, to give -dCt as above). Then just plot that. If you picked "adult" as your 'reference', then all your adult values will now cluster around 0, while larval and microfilaria; values will be either more or less than that.
If you want to share some sample data, I'm happy to work through an excel version of...well, all the above, if you like.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
9 answers
Hi!
I am performing PCR quantification of 5 inflammatory markers on 180 samples. As you can imagine, I therefore work on several 384-well plates. To compare them, I introduced a duplicate amplification control per primer for each plate to check if my amplification is indeed the same from one run to another.
Now, I have experimented with all my plates and I would like to run them through a statistical test to verify that the experiment is comparable from one plate to another. What statistical test should I use?
I'll let the stats pros answer! :)
Relevant answer
Answer
If you have included a plate calibrator (what you call an "amplification control", I assume), you can use it to adjust the Ct values to make them comparable between the plates.
If there is no plate-to-plate variation, then this adjustment would simply do nothing, and in any other case it will correct for this variation.
There is no need to demonstrate that the plate calibrators show that there is no between-plate variation.
If you still request some "test": there is no statistical test in that sense that would show equality. Statistical tests can only answer the question if your sample size is large enough to have sufficient confidence in concluding that there is some difference. Failing to reject the hypothesis of "no difference" is not evidence for the absence of a difference.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
Hi All,
I have the results of both qPCR CT values and RNA-seq TPM values. Now that I have 2 sets of data, is it proper to compare expression fold change (2^ of delta delta CT) with log2 of TPM values?
Thanks in advance,
Selim Rozyyev
#qPCR, #RNA-sequence analysis, #TPM.
Relevant answer
Answer
qPCR is considered the more sensitive and direct analysis. You use the RNA-seq to get a list of "interesting candidate genes" to then investigate using qPCR. You don't need to do any direct comparison to the original RNAseq data.
You can't know that the high TPM from RNA seq will also have high expression during qPCR. That's why you do the experiment.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
6 answers
Hello everyone,
I am running a qPCR assay. I chose gradient temperature option for each of my primer to get the best conditions the amplification happens (without heterodimers- NA in negative controls). However, I have seen that my housekeeping gene and one of my target gene have different annealing temperature. Can I run another qPCR set-up just for this gene by choosing gradient temperature option ? For instance; my gene in question in a row with 54C and housekeeping gene in a row with 60C. I think as far as the machine reads the signals at the same time, it won't pose a problem but I just want to make sure.
Many thanks,
Tuba
Relevant answer
Answer
Bertrand Cornu Can Kiessling Audrys G. Pauža Mohamed Khashan Dino Santos Matias Thank u all. After many trials I have decided to use single temperature. I have to admit that still qPCR experiment is not so objective to me (changes according to conditions very easily). However, since everyone use the same method, and what matters is to compare the mrna level for the same protein, I guess it is fine.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
2 answers
I am new to extracting RNA from fruit flesh. Currently, I'm extracting RNA from sweet cherry flesh using Fruitmate and Nucleospin Takara Bio. I have tried using RNeasy kit Qiagen but I failed (but with another fruit sample I can extract it).
For shredding the tissue I used multibeads shocker and store the sample at -80 degree celsius freezer.
I have tried to follow their instructions and try to create a clean workspace as possible. My problem is that the extraction always resulted in low concentration (both 1x and 2x elution) and absorption is also very small (0.xxx of A260 and A280), also A260/A280 ratio of 1.5 - 1.89. I want to know where did I do wrong but I don't know how to evaluate it. Please help.
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you for the suggestion Henry Kolge, I finally tried again using more samples in one column of NucleoSpin RNA and it works
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
I am currently undergoing my end of year research project which is testing if DNA can be found in a secondary transfer when multiple transfers have occurred, one of my replicates have a Ct value of 0, do I include this or find an average of the remaining replicates as when I have calculated out the fold change of my replicates it has a value of 20.29
Relevant answer
Answer
You might need to provide more experimental design information.
Are you dealing with very low expected [template], such that Cqs are often 30+ (in which case "no amplification" genuinely implies "no target"), or are you dealing with fairly robust [template], i.e. Cqs of 20-30 (in which case "no amplification" means "freak weird event")?
If the former, the extent of quantitative info you can glean is going to be more limited anyway (stochastic template numbers will be inherently variable), and you should flag the well as "no amplification".
If the latter, you just ignore it.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
2 answers
Hi,
I am a beginner at qPCR and would highly appreciate help and thoughts on this.
The melt curve analysis states that there are multiple Tm peaks in all of the NTCs, however these NTC peaks are quite small compared to the single peak from the samples I'm analyzing (i.e. reactions with template) and therefore I am wondering how much of a problem it is. Most of the NTCs don't reach detectable amplification (image below). Is there a certain amplitude in the melt curve under which one can disregard signal as "background"?
Relevant answer
Answer
Rodrigo Zañartu Mellado Thanks a lot for your response
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
I'm doing PCR and qPCR frequently. My assay is extremely sensitive so I need to pipette a very exact volume from my SOP. From my experience and also my school lab course, I learned to press the pipette to the 1st stop to get the desired volume, and then press all the way to the second stop to expel all the liquid. However, I was harshly judged by my supervisor for using such skill. My supervisor said it must be done only at 1st stop, picking the liquid at 1st stop and expelling the liquid at 1st stop. I tried the above way but always left some residue on the wall of the tip, which raised my concern a lot.
My supervisor made a judgment that if I can't expel liquid at the 1st stop, it is my tech skill problem. I also asked some co-workers ( sophisticated), and some of them indeed stop at the 1st stop to dispense an accurate amount, and ignore the residue on the tip. One coworker advised because of the air pressure, angle, and speed when you pick the liquid, it might over-pick the liquid so dispensing at 1st stop is accurate enough.
My liquid usually thawed cold serum, enzyme, probes, and buffer, so I'm less concerned about evaporation. I'm grateful for any suggestions here!
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello Yun Sawa
"I learned to press the pipette to the 1st stop to get the desired volume, and then press all the way to the second stop to expel all the liquid."
You are right. The method you are following is called forward pipetting.
There are two types of pipetting techniques.
Forward and reverse pipetting modes that can be used with a mechanical pipette.
In forward pipetting, the target volume is aspirated and dispensed, and a separate blowout step is used to completely empty the tip by pressing the plunger to the second stop.
In reverse pipetting, the target volume is aspirated with an excess amount. Upon pressing the plunger to the first stop, the total target volume is dispensed, and the excess amount is left in the tip. The excess amount is either returned or discarded by pressing the plunger to the second stop. The presence of the excess volume has significant benefits for pipetting performance in certain circumstances, such as when one has to pipette volatile or viscous liquids.
You should go for forward pipetting. In forward pipetting, you may depress the plunger to the first stop, immerse the tip into the liquid, and aspirate by releasing the plunger. Remove the pipette from the liquid and depress the plunger to the second stop to dispense the entire content. While dispensing the sample, position the tip to touch the side of the container to deliver any residual sample remaining in the tip. Keep your thumb pressed on the second stop of the plunger and remove the tip to avoid sample re-aspiration into the pipette tip. Make sure that you see the sample leaving the tip. The forward mode of pipetting yields better accuracy and precision.
Besides the above, some tips of pipetting are given below which may be of help to you.
1. You should always pre-wet the tip as it increases humidity within the tip, thus reducing any variation. If you are using the tip multiple times without pre-wetting it, then there are chances that a lower volume will be dispensed in the first few rounds.
2. Apply the same pressure and speed when you aspirate and dispense the contents for reproducibility.
3. When you are pipetting small volumes such as less than 50ul remove the pipette from the center of the vial. Avoid holding the pipette at an angle as it may alter the volume of the sample aspirated.
4. When you are about to dispense the content of the tip, you may observe some droplets on the outside of the tip. You may wipe out those droplets with a lint-free cloth. But be a little careful as excess wiping may suck the sample from the opening of the tip leading to sample loss.
Best.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
6 answers
Good day,
If protein expression in blood monocytes was low (detected by western blot) and protein level in serum (detected by ELISA) was high? what dose it mean?
Note: the protein should not leave the nucleus because it’s a DNA-binding protein.
Relevant answer
Answer
Agree that just because it's DNA-binding, that doesn't mean it can't be secreted too. But if you are sure that it is not secreted, necrosis-type cell is the only way I can think of for it to get into serum. Also, are you sure the protein is only expressed in monocytes?
As for your result, are you confident your protocol for making the cell lysate does enough to preserve protein stability? Cell lysates can be fickle in that regard.
Another potential issue are posttranslational modifications. If the secreted form has different PTMs than the intracellular one (which is common), this might affect antibody affinity.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
8 answers
I have never isolated RNA from blood, let alone serum and I really don't know which is the best strategi. Also I don't know which kit to use. For now, I found 2 Qiagen kits: miRNeasy Serum/Plasma Advanced Kit and QIAamp RNA Blood Mini Kit and I don't know which one is more suitable. After isolation, I'll perform RT-PCR. What is your experience?
Relevant answer
Answer
What are you looking for?
If you use whole blood, you'll actually get meaningful amounts of mRNA, because blood contains transcriptionally-active cells.
if you use serum, you kinda won't, because serum is a cell free fluid. You'll maybe have trace mRNAs released from damaged cells, but these will be few in number and thus low in abundance.
Serum will, however, be rich in miRs, both released from damaged cells and as constitutive components of the circulatory milieu.
If you are interested in serum microRNAs, serum is fine. If you're interested in mRNAs in microvesicles/exosomes, then serum is also probably fine, but if you're interested in anything else, then I'd say: use blood.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
Hi all,
I am trying to set up a qPCR multiplex reaction using HEX and Cy3 probes; however, when using the HEX probe alone, I can definitely see a significant signal in the Cy3 channel. Has anyone ever observed something like that? I thought I could put them together but it seems like it's not going to be the case.
I would be grateful to get any advice on how to make this reaction better.
Just to give more details, I am using QS5 from ThermoF so the channel I am setting up are VIC (for HEX) and TAMRA (for Cy3).
Thanks in advance for your help!
Relevant answer
Answer
QS5 will need custom calibrated for both HEX and Cy3 on the second and third channels respectively. This is essential for an appropriate fluorescence acquisition and prevent signal crosstalk. Get back in touch with me if you need support on this.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
6 answers
So i'm testing samples for RNA viruses. We are using the phenol chloroform RNA extraction method, nanodropping to find concentration of RNA and quality, diluting the samples (in NF water) to 200 ng/microliter, converting the RNA to cDNA, then running q-PCR on each sample (in triplicate) with a no template negative control. All of the wells show DNA growth at various cycles. I had my mentor run everything from scratch as well, and he is also getting product in the NTC wells. Has anyone seen something like this happen before?
Relevant answer
Answer
Firstly, it is sure DNA interference with primers during PCR amplifications.
Also, you should add test negative control to the PCR run , it means add all components of the reaction except sample , use a dist water instead of sample, this is an evidence of there is no contaminations in the all reagents you used.
with my best wishes ....
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
What protocol is best for determining the protein expression level in the brain using quantitative RT-PCR?
Brain tissue preservation suitable for the protocol and how to analyse
Relevant answer
Answer
Thanks for your response Assel Abbad
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
I'm designing a diagnostic qPCR triplex assay for three parasitic species and have this weird weird thing that keeps happening where I test my assays in singleplex and they're specific but then in triplex one of them isn't. I have done every possible BLAST and bioinformatic analysis to verify that the assay isn't cross amplifying, so I'm certain it's not a specificity issue. There's no genomic explanation and I've also contacted both ThermoFisher (the maker of the machine) and IDT (where we get our primers) and they said there was nothing that should be causing this problem.
The three probes I'm using are FAM, VIC, and TAMRA - recommended by a ThermoFisher rep and our machines are calibrated for all of these (I've seen this weird thing happen on multiple machines). The VIC assay is picking up the FAM target at almost the exact same Cq values as the FAM assay is picking up the FAM target. To me, that means the two species would have to be present in equal parts in the sample and it's not just a contamination problem since I'm putting in just one species' DNA in each well. The VIC assay still picks up the VIC target, but LATER than it picks up the FAM target. So apparently the VIC assay is picking up a completely unrelated species far better than it's own target species?? I think not.
I've done so much to verify that it's not a specificity issue, including running the VIC assay in singleplex with the FAM target DNA and only two wells of a positive control to make sure the qPCR worked - it showed absolutely no amplification in any of the FAM target wells. My NTC wells are always negative and my positive controls always work. I've reached out to anyone I can think of for help because I don't know what on earth is going on and no one has been able to give me even any possibilities. I have this weird feeling it's something with the settings on the StepOne Plus, but I'm not sure what.
Has anyone else had anything like this happen? Or does anyone have suggestions of other things to try?
Relevant answer
Answer
What is your master mix passive dye?
Did you try this on another thermocycler?
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
2 answers
Dear RG comunity,
I am analyzing my qPCR data of male and female, treated and non treated groups. Considering there are reasons to assume treatment may diffrently affect expression of genes of interest according to sex, two-way ANOVA seems appropriate (assumptions checked).
What I ask for help is the normalization process in the 2-ΔΔCt calculation, for which average ΔCt values of a reference/control group are important to calculate expression in the treated group. If I normalize values separated to sex (e.g. use ΔCt values of untreated males to calculate 2-ΔΔCt for treated males and do in the same way with females), would I still be able to compare sex or treatment x sex effects of a 2-way ANOVA?
Best regards,
Rodrigo
Relevant answer
Answer
You have ΔCt values. This is your response. It is reasonable to assume that ΔCt values are normal distributed.
Your experiment has two factors (sex and treatment). Hence, you should use a conventional (two-) factorial model including the sex:treatment interaction to analyze the differential effect of the treatment between the sexes.
There is no need to specify any "control" or to "normalize" against anything.
Particularly, don't calculate 2^-ΔΔCt and don't use such values for your analysis - they can not assumed normal distributed, and they should not be analyzed with conventional statistical models (that assume the response being normal distributed).
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
7 answers
I've determined the LOD/LOQ value for a qPCR assay (1 primer pair, 1 taqman probe) and it's higher than expected. I've been trying to figure out why - i've tried to find information about this but all I can find online is explanations of what the LOD is or reporting LOD values from different assays.
Could anyone point me in the right direction?
Thanks
Relevant answer
Answer
You can use your Current MasterMix for any other Well-Designed reaction. So the new reaction will have your MasterMix and of course your pol enzyme( but not ur Primers and probe). Then you need to observe the E values (above 0.85 is good) and R square value ( above 0.99980) is perfect. of course you need around 5 10-folded serial dilutions to measure you values with good precision. Remember if your mastermix (and enzyme) is good you need to check primers and probe for your original reaction.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
I have done my qPCR experiments and gave me some results, I used the DDCt method and I calculated the 2^(-DDCt), I transformed my data in base 10 logarithm and separated my samples between control and patients. I want to ask if I see that there is for example a fold change 4 times higher in patients for my gene of interest then I use one-tail or two-tail t-test, and what if the distribution is not normal, will I do non-parametric test, or I can skip the outliers and do the t-test. I am very confused in that statistical conundrum.
Relevant answer
Answer
If your data is not normally distributed, you should use non-parametric statistical tests such as Wilcoxon rank sum tests or Mann-Whitney U tests in order to compare the expression levels between the two groups.
Regarding the one tailed or two tailed. one tailed can specify the direction of the effect (positive or negative) but the two tailed one can be used for both direction at the same time.
Best...
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
14 answers
Hi to all.
My question is how can I optimize my RTqPCR if the cDNA dilutions ended up in similar Cq?
I synthesized my cDNA from 350 ng total RNA, assuming 1:1 production I should have 350 ng cDNA in 20 ul right? Then I did a dilution of 1/2, 1/5, 1/10 and 1/20 (I know the first three are consider quite a lot to be used in the run) and used them in a 20 ul run. The gene is a ref. gene: GAPDH. Interestingly the Cq values aren't that different between the dilutions (~29, ~30, ~31 and ~30). Obviously these aren't good values but I don't know what can I do to optimize the run.
Relevant answer
Answer
Alright, I will try to share what tips/tricks I can.
Honestly, while RNA is vastly more labile than DNA, it isn't really some sort of mystic-grade vulnerability, and you don't need utterly RNAse free environments to isolate perfectly viable RNA. They will help, obviously, but just starting with RNAse-free stuff, using careful pipetting and not making obvious mistakes will usually be sufficient.
So: use filter tips. Here the filter is primarily protecting your sample from whatever gunk might be hiding up in your pipette barrel. Use filter tips for everything (1000ul, 200ul, 10ul).
Use RNAse-free microcentrifuge tubes (most prepacked tubes should be certified RNAse free): keep a dedicate bag for RNA work, keep the top sealed/folded over when not in use, and only fish out tubes with gloved hands. If you put an ungloved hand into the bag, then assume the bag is now no longer good for RNA work (or use at your own risk).
Use RNAse free water for everything: either buy it, or make your own using DEPC or DMPC: add DEPC to 0.1%, shake vigorously and leave at 37degrees overnight with the lid of the bottle slightly loose. Autoclave, then close the lid tight.
Take small aliquots for working (I tip out 50ml at a time into a falcon tube) so you're not constantly dipping in and out of your stock. If an aliquot gets contaminated, or you suspect it's contaminated, throw it away, make another.
Use a bench area you trust: this doesn't mean you need a dedicated area, but use common sense (if a genomic DNA extraction protocol involves 'add 100ul of RNAse H', for example, go do that protocol somewhere else).
Use common sense in general: just be aware that the primary source of RNAse activity is the investigator: we are covered in bacteria all the time, and all of those are robust RNAse sources.
Wear gloves. Wear them basically all the time. If you think the gloves are dirty, change the gloves.
Next up: practical tips/tricks and when to be most careful.
If you can, freeze tissue. Freeze everything until you need it not to be frozen. RNA inside a sample frozen at -80 will endure far better than RNA inside fresh tissue, and while its frozen, it cannot be broken down by RNAses (they're frozen too).
Try to keep tissue frozen RIGHT up until you lyse/denature everything.
Frozen tissue is safe.
Lysis: I use trizol (or trizol equivalent) methods for almost everything. Almost nothing survives the addition of large amounts of chaotropic salts dissolved in phenol: a frozen sample covered in RNAses can still be used for RNA extraction if you dump it straight into trizol, because the RNAses will unfold and denature right along with everything else.
I typically freeze tissue in liquid nitrogen, store it at -80, crush to to powder under liquid nitrogen (i.e. never let it defrost) and then add trizol directly to the frozen powder. The first time the tissue melts, it's melting in phenol.
RNA inside trizol suspension will endure, and can indeed be frozen at -80 for longer-term storage.
RNA in trizol is safe.
Once you add chloroform to initiate phase separation: THAT'S when you need to start being extra careful. The aqueous phase is RNA in solution, and it's essentially unprotected. Collect aqueous phases one at a time, tilting the tube to minimise stuff falling into it. Cap tubes as soon as you're done transferring.
I typically use isopropanol precipitation rather than columns, because I like to see the size of my pellets, but all downstream stuff from phase separation is extra-careful-time. Precipitated RNA itself is actually fairly safe, since RNAses can't really degrade a solid chunk of dry RNA (accordingly, you can also freeze pelleted RNA at -80 for some weeks).
If you're going down column-based preps, then all the on-column stuff is largely out of your hands. Keep the columns wrapped up and clean (most come individually wrapped, but if they're in a bag, treat that bag as for tubes, above: gloves for all the things, seal up when not in use).
Isolated RNA should be either frozen immediately, or kept on ice for spectrophotometry/bioanalyser, and THEN frozen.
Try to make it into cDNA as soon as possible, and try to minimise freeze thaw: better to make a lot of cDNA in one batch than to keep dipping into it for multiple one-step reactions.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
7 answers
I've run RNAseq and qPCR on a set of genes, and while the log2 expression values are consistent between the tests for most of the genes in the set, there are a handful that appear to be unregulated according to the RNAseq results and down regulated according to the qPCR results (and vice versa). Is there any possible reason that could explain this, other than just human error?
Relevant answer
Answer
In NGS, read counts have somehow to be mapped to genes. Reads are not always matching to only a unique gene, so it partially depends on the mapping algorithm how many "reads" are attributed to a gene.
Further, genes may be expressed in different variants, and the presence or abscence of an exon may impact the number of reads attributed to that gene.
For genes that are not regulated very strongly, the method used for normalization can impact the eventually observed direction of regulation.
qPCR is sensitive to the assay performance and the stability of the chosen reference genes. If amplification efficiencies are not ideal, results may change depending on the absolute Ct values of the gene. However, these are eventually "human errors" of not properly validating the qPCR assays and reference genes.
These are possible reasons that come into my mind. There may be other reasons.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
I've read that I need cDNA standard curves to test primer efficencies.
I'd like to know if I could use genomic DNA instead, since I've got too many different conditions from which different cDNAs have been synthesized.
In the end, depending on the efficencies, I've read that I may use either the Double Delta or the Pfaffl method to quantify the relative expression of genes.
Relevant answer
Answer
Typically not. Most folks studying gene expression are using primers that amplify a target region that is spanning an intron. The difference in product size from gDNA vs. cDNA would mean you can't do a fair comparison of amplification efficiency.
The only way this would be possible is if:
1. Your primers amplify the exact same product in gDNA vs cDNA (not ideal since it's much harder to rule out contamination/incomplete DNAase treatment).
2. Your DNA extraction is extremely high-quality
3. All of your genes of interest are from the same part of the genome (e.g. all nDNA, no mtDNA or cpDNA)
4. You are doing a relative expression-level study (not exact copy number).
Most folks clone their target region of interest as a cDNA into a plasmid.
Good luck!
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
8 answers
Hello ResearchGate community,
I have run standard curves on cDNA synthesised from whole mouse liver RNA and for two of my genes of interest I have gotten melt curves that have a smaller secondary peak (see attached images 1 and 2). I am using a SYBR Green Master Mix and running the samples on a Quantstudio 12k flex machine - the rest of my genes of interest appear to be working well and producing a single clean peak (see attached image 3). I am unsure of whether this indicates primer dimerization, non-specific amplification, or is of no concern as I cannot find anything online about what a peak after the primary amplicon peak means... Please help!
Thank you for your time.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear McCaffrey,
1. Have you run the agarose gel? I recommend you run the agarose gel to see if there are any other no-specific products.
2. You can also check the melting curve and gel product for no template control to see if that has the same pattern.
3. According to the second melting peak it does not seem to be primer dimer. Primer dimer melting temperature is generally smaller. As the second melting peak is around 90c it could be a non-specific product or may be bacterial contamination in the reagents. If it is a non-specific product then you can try to reduce the PCR cycle numbers to see if this can eliminate the second melting peak.
Best,
Monzur
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
Hi all,
I am performing QPCR with the E-cadherin gene and getting ct values around 11-12. I had done the same experiment two years back but back then the ct values ranged around 25-26. Can anybody explain what's happening?
Are ct values around 11-12 for a gene like ECAD acceptable?
Thanks in advance,
Swarnali
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you Ritihaas Surya Challapalli and Mohamed Khashan for your reply. I will first standardize cDNA concentration as you suggested.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
I have values of two treatment groups with similar gene target and all 3 groups have the same beta actin value. Treated 1 = 21.00 cq and Treated 2 = 20.50 cq, while both treatments having the same Control = 19.00 cq. From this rough data, is it reliable to say Treated 2 have higher expression than Treated 1 against Control due to lower cq value by 0.5? Thank you in advance
Relevant answer
Answer
Try to add technical replicates and at least 3 biological replicates to get a statistically significant data. However practically with the difference of 0.5 cT you cannot actually comment too much about the expression of gene. A higher number of biological replicates would help in this case.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
9 answers
Hello everyone!
My problem is that unfortunately I am getting a good Ct value in NTC (NFW). I have tried three different primer sets (Target of three different genes) with NFW from different sources and surprisingly each primer set returned with a good Ct values.
Believing that SYBR-green (fast) could have been contaminated so, I used a totally new SYBR-green reagent yet there was no significant change observed upon RT-PCR.
I ordered new set of primers for same genes thinking that might be stock primers were contaminated and repeated RT-PCR with new SYBR green and fresh NFW yet I see there is very mild yet not a big difference in Ct values.
I use gloves and filter tips all the time.
I will be very grateful if anyone can give me some useful suggestion or insight to fix this never ending problem.
Reaction volume per well= 20ul
Primer conc.- 1uM each (FP/RP)
amplicon size ≈ 70-80 bp
Gene 1 Ct= 19
Gene 2 Ct ≈ 26-28
Thanks!
Relevant answer
Answer
Most common source of contamination is your micropipettes. Clean your work area, micropipettes, and throw away ALL of your reagents (buffer, water, primers, etc.). Make everything new (as if you were setting up a lab for the first time, don't use anything already made).
Also, don't use the same micropipettes to set up PCR that you use to handle amplified DNA. You can dilute a PCR reaction 1:1 billion and still get amplification.
Good luck!
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
1 answer
Hello, I would appreciate getting help to do appropriate statistical analyses on my qPCR data in GraphPad Prism for the sake of the statistical tools and graphing power.
I had already done the delta delta Ct analysis in Excel. I am dissatisfied because Excel doesn't offer much statistical power or good data visualization. Additionally, looking at the 2^-deltadeltaCt does not follow a Gaussian distribution, so nonparametric tests are required.
My experimental design is as follows:
3 technical replicates were done per sample
2 biological replicates were done per condition
I have 1 control (untreated sample) and 5 additional conditions
I have 2 genes of interest and am normalizing to GAPDH
So, for example, for each gene of interest tested (as well as GAPDH), I had two wells of iPSC untreated, isolated the RNA from each, then used the RNA from each well to do 3 PCRs for 1 GOI.
If I just try giving graphpad the 2^-deltadeltaCt to compare and analyze, then it will only see a sample size of 2 for each condition and there will be no statistical significance found between conditions.
How would you recommend I analyze this data in Graphpad?
Since I am still relatively new to GraphPad and not a statistician, it would be appreciated if more of a step-by-step solution is offered.
Thank you.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Draven,
I would say that 2 replicates per group is insufficient, you should have at least 4-5 replicates for each condition to get any more or less reliable result.
In order to play with your data and try to perform statistical analysis, you may treat every technical replicate as an individual sample, thus having 6 samples per group (but as you understand, this approach is incorrect and will not give you publishable results).
As for the step-by-step description of the analysis, I would recommend my answer to a similar question: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Qpcr-statistical-analysis/1
But as you have more than two groups, for your data you will have to use either ANOVA (+ post hoc Tukey or Sidak - if the distribution is normal) or Kruskell-Wallis (+ post hoc Mann-Whitney - if the distribution is non-normal) - instead of t-test or Mann-Whitney.
Here is a wonderful video with an explanation of how to perform one-way ANOVA analysis:
If you wish, you can send me your dataset in Excel, and I'll send you back all the calculations and GraphPad Prism analysis.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
I've got a Roche LightCycler that I use to run my qPCRs. It used to take 1h 37 min to run a qPCR but now it take 1h 45 min using the same exact settings. Could the problem be that the machine is taking longer to reach certain temperatures? Does that mean it needs servicing?
Thanks!
Relevant answer
Answer
The room temperature could make some differences, usually in summer with AC on they take a little bit longer, but if the room Ta is not drastically modified, a call to the maintenance service could be a must. Also, the reading lamp have to be regularly checked if you hadn't so.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
5 answers
The first few qPCR runs the primers worked and I was getting signals in my samples/positive controls. However, now when I run another qPCR with the same primers I get no signal. I've tried using a fresh primer aliquot but that hasn't worked. The primer stock has been defrosted several times and is less than a year old so I'm not if its degraded or not. If it's degraded, would it make sense to slightly increase the primer concentration in my PCR reactions to get a signal?
Many thanks!
Relevant answer
Answer
Since your primers have thawed and frozen several times, it's more likely to be why your qPCR is not working. They reduce the efficiency and effectiveness of the qPCR. I would recommend purchasing new primers and preparing multiple aliquots. This will reduce repeated thawing and also avoid primer contamination. And as previously mentioned in a prior answer, "TE buffer" is preferred in long-term storage.
Best wishes!
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
7 answers
I am doing qPCR to quantify silencing some of the proteins I work with. but I see that my silenced values are greater than that of the control ones.
I got higher values in silenced samples after the double delta ct analysis. Essentially, my silenced samples are showing higher transcript levels compared to the un-silenced ones.
Relevant answer
Answer
Frederic Lepretre I think cDNA quality isnt a problem. As Andrea Becchimanzi suggested, I used primers for my own dsRNA. I have ordered new primers outside the dsRNA region and once I complete the new round of qPCRs I will update all of you. Thank you very much for you all of your comments and suggestions. I highly appreciate it.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
I am currently using the Quanti-Nova SYBR Green PCR Kit from Qiagen and I would like to know how much cDNA (ng) will be sufficient for amplification of my genes of interest (BMP2, 6 and SMAD6). Does anyone have worked with this kit previously?
And another question if at a qPCR experiment we use the same amount and some of the samples are not amplified, this means that they are undetected or I must modify the concentration so that qPCR can detect the very low concentration for the sake of statistical analysis?
Relevant answer
Answer
The exact ng will depend on the expression of your genes in your exact samples. You can check publications with similar experiments to get an idea of the range. But the only way to know for sure is to try your samples. The kit has suggestions for how much to start with.
You'll have to know something about the lower detection limit from your standard curve. You can increase the amount of starting ng for your genes-of-interest and account for the change in starting materials for your calculations.
Good luck!
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
Hi there,
I need to validate a series of reference genes (i.e. housekeeping genes) for my qPCR assay and I need to construct a standard curve for each primer pair to check for efficiency. I am using range of snail embryo tissue samples, as well as a snail adult tissue sample.
Due to the limited quantity of RNA from the embryos, I would prefer to use the adult tissue (of high RNA yield) to conduct the standard curves. However, I am planning to use both embryo and adult tissue samples for validating my primers, but it's likely the adult tissue samples will be excluded from the comparison of expression data.
Thus, my question is: would it be acceptable to use cDNA from the adult tissue to examine primer efficiency (e.g. constructing standard curves) as long as the sample is tested (and included in primer validation experiments), but not used in the final analysis?
Relevant answer
Answer
My preferred material for doing this is plasmid DNA. There are several suppliers (I use GenScript who can synthesise your target sequences and clone them into a plasmid, which they supply to you as DNA. Putting several different target sequences into the same plasmid is no problem and doesn't cost much more. You can then make a dilution series of the plasmid for you dilution series, and you can calculate the exact number of plasmid copies from the DNA concentration and the molecular weight of the plasmid.
The plasmid will cost you several hundred Euros, but you only need one and you'll have enough to last you forever. Note, however, that the concentrated plasmid is very 'hot' and is almost as good a contamination source as a PCR product. I do my first dilutions in a non-PCR laboratory and only bring it into the sample extraction lab when it's down to about 107 copies/µl.
Regarding John's suggestion of using PCR products; I have reservations as my experience with this approach has not been good. I think this was due to primer-dimer. Once formed, primer dimers amplify extremely efficiently and they can outcompete the authentic reaction. But that's just my impression. Others may have better experiences.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
2 answers
manufacturers instructions: 100μl serum (or plasma)
Relevant answer
Answer
It can vary depending on which kit you are trying to use.
But the range is anywhere between 50uL-5000uL.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
7 answers
Hello everyone,
I am working on genes differentially expressing between normal and diseased conditions. I finished qPCR and obtained 2^-DDCT values for 9 different genes. I am using Graphpad Prism for visualization of the data. I need help regarding statistical analysis of this data, whether to use unpaired T-test or 2 way ANOVA for this data.
Relevant answer
Answer
As you explained, there is only one experimental factor, so you may use a t-test to test the hypothesis that the mean difference between dCt values is zero. Take care using the dCt values for statistics.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
8 answers
Hi everyone,
I performed a qPCR to assess the collagen type 1 gene expression in the mesenchymal cell line.
prior to the test, I got a little amount of total RNA than what I regularly get (10 ng/ul) as the cell growth was low.
so during performing the qPCR I found out that my housekeeping gene has a Ct of about 30 but the target gene (collagen 1) has no Ct in 40 cycles. so I decided to extend the cycle number to 60 cycles. I observed the Ct for collagen type 1 on cycle 50.
if there were no primer dimer and nonspecific products in the result, is this result reliable for gene expression assessment?
thank you for your kind guidance in advance.
Relevant answer
Answer
As a rule of thumb, 35-36 cycles is enough to amplify just about anything (i.e. a single starting template molecule), and for qPCR you can usually assume a Cq of ~35 represents the absolute lower limit of detection.
Accordingly, Cq values of ~34 = 2 molecules, ~33 = 4, and so on.
A reference gene giving a Cq of 30 means there are countable numbers of reference transcripts in your wells (~30-40 or so), and this should never be the case for a reference (which should generally be fairly abundant). You have very little starting material, and the reference is telling you this.
Remember, you...cannot have less than one molecule in a well. PCR doesn't work on "half a template" or "0.001% of a template": there's a molecule there, or there isn't.
Getting a Cq at cycle 50 means it isn't there.
Alternatively, you could have a ruinously inefficient PCR, in which case you'll see what _should_ appear at cycle 25 actually appear at cycle 50 (or whatever), and if this is the case, your data is meaningless. This isn't so bad, though: you can always redesign primers to get a more efficient PCR reaction.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
4 answers
I have used GAPDH, SDHA, B2M and 18S. All of these HKGs are showing varying Ct values.
1. I am starting with diff. cell numbers but am using the same RNA amount for the cDNA synthesis.
2. I am isolating RNA from a monolayer and the supernatant. The GAPDH and 18S Ct values for the monolayer are almost identical. There is less deviation for the supernatant 18S CT values. I have used GAPDH for WB with the same treatment and same cell line and it showed to be a good HKG.
the cells I am collecting in the supernatant is a mixture of live and dead cells. Could it be that my HKGs are being degraded causing high Ct values?
Is there a good HKG for dying cells?
Is there a way of separating live and dead cells from the supernatant?
Relevant answer
Answer
"All these HKGs are showing varying values" isn't hugely helpful.
Do you mean they vary within a gene? (i.e. sample 1 for SDHA is higher Cq than sample 2 and 3 for SDHA)
If so, this is generally fine: the whole point of references is to normalise for sample-to-sample variation that isn't a consequence of your treatment. You assume that your reference genes would (all else being equal) be of comparable expression, and thus any observed variation in expression must be attributable to other sources of variation: RNA extraction efficiency, RNA integrity, and cDNA synthesis efficiency. Variation per se is not problematic.
If half of your samples are two+ orders of magnitude greater than your other half, that's not good, but a degree of variation is fine.
Do you mean they vary between genes? (i.e. sample 1 for SDHA is really different from sample 1 for GAPDH)
If so, again this is absolutely fine: there is no reason to assume references will have comparable expression levels. 18S, for example, is usually orders of magnitude higher than everything else, because total RNA is like, 85% ribosomes.
Do you mean they vary within a gene, and the pattern of variation isn't consistent between genes? (i.e. samples 1-3 go "down, up, down" for SDHA, but go "up, down, up" for GAPDH)
If so, this _might_ be a sign your references are poorly selected, or it might simply be innate variation. Mostly depending on how stark the variation is. RNA is far more labile than protein, and transcriptional changes can thus occur rapidly. Gene expression is also subject to stochastic noise, such that sometimes, for whatever reason, gene X is just...switched on, a lot. Or off.
Using multiple references is a good way of buffering against these innate variations.
So I guess my next questions would be: why are you using four references (two is good, three is ideal, four is overkill), and how did you choose those references?
Also, re: dead cells. Assume dead cells have no meaningful RNA. Dying cells tend to lose RNA so fast that you're very unlikely to capture "mid degradation" stages. They're also not transcriptionally active, so a "reference for dead cells" is sort of meaningless.
And don't assume "works in westerns" means it works in qPCR: GAPDH can work well as a reference under some scenarios. It can also be terrible in others.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
Does anyone have recommendations (design and/or protocols) for carrying out SNP genotyping with HRM on a CFX96 without the precision melt analysis package? Is it possible?
My understanding is the sensitivity is gated by the machine (and possibly the calibration kit), so I'm not sure why the software is even needed when open source analysis packages are available.
Thanks in advance!
Relevant answer
Answer
I am interested in following up on this topic..
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
3 answers
So, I’ve gotten to a new lab, I used to use PEX4 as a qPCR reference for Arabidopsis expression. I’ve gotten to a new lab that works on mice and humans, they have used here HSP60 as qPCR reference, I see it’s not as reliable as I’d like, the molecular biology “department” here was one person before me that left 4 days after I was hired, so it’s just me now.
I’m looking at papers and I see there a few dozen recommendations for different housekeeping genes, with varying levels of reliability, can anyone point me to specific gene and/or primers that work for them personally for mice and/or humans?
* Edit as I have not worked with mice before, I was unaware of the need for this information, thank you John Hildyard, we are working predominantly with C57 mouse line and its MDX mutant (male and female) and with quadricep, gastrocnemius, diaphragm, liver and hart tissues.
Thank you.
Relevant answer
Answer
Yeah, that's great. And by a strikingly convenient coincidence, for mdx/WT muscle specifically, I've got you covered:
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
1 answer
I need to do RT qPCR. But I was unable to find CYBR dye for it. Therefore can you give me any method to do the RT qPCR?
Relevant answer
Answer
Try finding SYBR.
  • asked a question related to Quantitative RT-PCR
Question
1 answer
I need to do genotyping. I understand that I need primer for the gene such as forward and reverse. why there is additional primer He/Wt-F? Why is it needed and what is function this primer ?
Relevant answer