"Hook"-calibration of GeneChip-microarrays: Chip characteristics and expression measures

BackgroundMicroarray experiments rely on several critical steps that may introduce biases and uncertainty in downstream analyses. These steps include mRNA sample extraction, amplification and labelling, hybridization, and scanning causing chip-specific systematic variations on the raw intensity level. Also the chosen array-type and the up-to-dateness of the genomic information probed on the chip affect the quality of the expression measures. In the accompanying publication we presented theory and algorithm of the so-called hook method which aims at correcting expression data for systematic biases using a series of new chip characteristics.ResultsIn this publication we summarize the essential chip characteristics provided by this method, analyze special benchmark experiments to estimate transcript related expression measures and illustrate the potency of the method to detect and to quantify the quality of a particular hybridization. It is shown that our single-chip approach provides expression measures responding linearly on changes of the transcript concentration over three orders of magnitude. In addition, the method calculates a detection call judging the relation between the signal and the detection limit of the particular measurement. The performance of the method in the context of different chip generations and probe set assignments is illustrated. The hook method characterizes the RNA-quality in terms of the 3'/5'-amplification bias and the sample-specific calling rate. We show that the proper judgement of these effects requires the disentanglement of non-specific and specific hybridization which, otherwise, can lead to misinterpretations of expression changes. The consequences of modifying probe/target interactions by either changing the labelling protocol or by substituting RNA by DNA targets are demonstrated.ConclusionThe single-chip based hook-method provides accurate expression estimates and chip-summary characteristics using the natural metrics given by the hybridization reaction with the potency to develop new standards for microarray quality control and calibration.

[1]  Karl Kornacker,et al.  Chipping away at the chip bias: RNA degradation in microarray analysis , 2003, Nature Genetics.

[2]  David B. Allison,et al.  A proposed metric for assessing the measurement quality of individual microarrays , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[3]  S. Enkemann,et al.  Identical probes on different high-density oligonucleotide microarrays can produce different measurements of gene expression , 2006, BMC Genomics.

[4]  Stephan Preibisch,et al.  Calibration of microarray gene-expression data. , 2010, Methods in molecular biology.

[5]  Albert Zlotnik,et al.  Effects of RNA degradation on gene expression analysis of human postmortem tissues , 2005, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[6]  Naoaki Ono,et al.  Experimental optimization of probe length to increase the sequence specificity of high-density oligonucleotide microarrays , 2007, BMC Genomics.

[7]  Rickard Sandberg,et al.  Improved precision and accuracy for microarrays using updated probe set definitions , 2007, BMC Bioinformatics.

[8]  Rafael A Irizarry,et al.  Exploration, normalization, and summaries of high density oligonucleotide array probe level data. , 2003, Biostatistics.

[9]  Huda Akil,et al.  Effect of agonal and postmortem factors on gene expression profile: quality control in microarray analyses of postmortem human brain , 2004, Biological Psychiatry.

[10]  Hanlee P. Ji,et al.  The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project shows inter- and intraplatform reproducibility of gene expression measurements. , 2006, Nature biotechnology.

[11]  Rafael A Irizarry,et al.  Analysis of Affymetrix GeneChip data using amplified RNA. , 2006, BioTechniques.

[12]  G. T. Barkema,et al.  Effective affinities in microarray data , 2006, q-bio/0605007.

[13]  G. T. Barkema,et al.  Modelling background intensity in Affymetrix Genechips , 2007 .

[14]  S. Batalov,et al.  A gene atlas of the mouse and human protein-encoding transcriptomes. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  Felix Naef,et al.  Solving the riddle of the bright mismatches: labeling and effective binding in oligonucleotide arrays. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[16]  Toralf Kirsten,et al.  Interactions in Oligonucleotide Hybrid Duplexes on Microarrays , 2004 .

[17]  K M Kroll,et al.  Modeling background intensity in DNA microarrays. , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[18]  Tatiana Popova,et al.  Effect of RNA quality on transcript intensity levels in microarray analysis of human post-mortem brain tissues , 2008, BMC Genomics.

[19]  Zoltan Szallasi,et al.  Replacing cRNA targets with cDNA reduces microarray cross-hybridization , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[20]  Krzysztof Fujarewicz,et al.  Meta- and reanalysis of gene expression profiles of hot and cold thyroid nodules and papillary thyroid carcinoma for gene groups. , 2006, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[21]  Atul J. Butte,et al.  Reproducibility of gene expression across generations of Affymetrix microarrays , 2003, BMC Bioinformatics.

[22]  R. Myers,et al.  Evolving gene/transcript definitions significantly alter the interpretation of GeneChip data , 2005, Nucleic acids research.

[23]  Stephen C. Harris,et al.  Rat toxicogenomic study reveals analytical consistency across microarray platforms , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[24]  T. Speed,et al.  Summaries of Affymetrix GeneChip probe level data. , 2003, Nucleic acids research.

[25]  Stephan Preibisch,et al.  "Hook"-calibration of GeneChip-microarrays: Theory and algorithm , 2008, Algorithms for Molecular Biology.

[26]  Andrej-Nikolai Spiess,et al.  Amplified RNA degradation in T7-amplification methods results in biased microarray hybridizations , 2003, BMC Genomics.

[27]  Maqc Consortium.  The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project shows inter- and intraplatform reproducibility of gene expression measurements , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[28]  S. Preibisch,et al.  Base pair interactions and hybridization isotherms of matched and mismatched oligonucleotide probes on microarrays. , 2005, Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids.

[29]  Affymetrix GeneChip,et al.  GeneChip ® Expression Platform : Comparison , Evolution , and Performance , 2004 .

[30]  G. Church,et al.  Preferred analysis methods for Affymetrix GeneChips revealed by a wholly defined control dataset , 2005, Genome Biology.

[31]  Hans Binder,et al.  Thermodynamics of competitive surface adsorption on DNA microarrays , 2006 .

[32]  Terence P. Speed,et al.  Quality Assessment for Short Oligonucleotide Microarray Data , 2007, Technometrics.

[33]  Naoki Sugimoto,et al.  Temperature dependence of thermodynamic properties for DNA/DNA and RNA/DNA duplex formation. , 2002, European journal of biochemistry.

[34]  F. Mazzei,et al.  DNA, RNA and hybrid RNA-DNA oligomers of identical sequence: structural and dynamic differences. , 2000, Biophysical chemistry.

[35]  Robert R Klevecz,et al.  A rapid genome-scale response of the transcriptional oscillator to perturbation reveals a period-doubling path to phenotypic change , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[36]  Crispin J. Miller,et al.  Amplification protocols introduce systematic but reproducible errors into gene expression studies. , 2004, BioTechniques.

[37]  Yonghong Wang,et al.  Characterization of mismatch and high-signal intensity probes associated with Affymetrix genechips , 2007, Bioinform..

[38]  N. Sugimoto,et al.  Thermodynamic parameters to predict stability of RNA/DNA hybrid duplexes. , 1995, Biochemistry.

[39]  Conrad J Burden,et al.  Understanding the physics of oligonucleotide microarrays: the Affymetrix spike-in data reanalysed , 2007, Physical biology.

[40]  G. Grinstein,et al.  Relationship between gene expression and observed intensities in DNA microarrays—a modeling study , 2006, Nucleic acids research.

[41]  P. Collins,et al.  Performance comparison of one-color and two-color platforms within the Microarray Quality Control (MAQC) project , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[42]  Stephan Preibisch,et al.  Specific and nonspecific hybridization of oligonucleotide probes on microarrays. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[43]  Susan R. Wilson,et al.  Adsorption models of hybridization and post-hybridization behaviour on oligonucleotide microarrays , 2004, q-bio/0411005.

[44]  Michael W Pfaffl,et al.  RNA integrity and the effect on the real-time qRT-PCR performance. , 2006, Molecular aspects of medicine.

[45]  N. Patil,et al.  DNA hybridization to mismatched templates: a chip study. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[46]  Zhijin Wu,et al.  Feature-level exploration of a published Affymetrix GeneChip control dataset , 2006, Genome Biology.

[47]  Mark D. Robinson,et al.  A comparison of Affymetrix gene expression arrays , 2007, BMC Bioinformatics.

[48]  P. Mazière,et al.  Impact of RNA degradation on gene expression profiles: assessment of different methods to reliably determine RNA quality. , 2007, Journal of biotechnology.