* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download This is an example of a slide
Polyadenylation wikipedia , lookup
Genome evolution wikipedia , lookup
RNA interference wikipedia , lookup
Artificial gene synthesis wikipedia , lookup
Gene regulatory network wikipedia , lookup
Promoter (genetics) wikipedia , lookup
Eukaryotic transcription wikipedia , lookup
RNA silencing wikipedia , lookup
Gene expression wikipedia , lookup
Silencer (genetics) wikipedia , lookup
RNA polymerase II holoenzyme wikipedia , lookup
Epitranscriptome wikipedia , lookup
Gene expression profiling wikipedia , lookup
Transcriptional regulation wikipedia , lookup
User meeting ABC/UMC Microarray Technology Group, March 2004 Genomics Center Utrecht (ABC/UMC) Wijmenga Microarray Technology Group Dik van Leenen Tony Miles Marian Groot Koerkamp Joop van Helvoort Holstege Bioinformatics 3.4 fte Voest Transcription Regulation Bos etc. Program Introduction: Goals How the microarray facility works Guidelines Example studies Wet lab work (Joop van Helvoort) Goal Make microarray technology available in Utrecht so that many groups can publish high quality studies Consequences house facility within a research group that uses technology open facility DIY: using our arrays, expertise and equipment Expect collaborative attitude partial cost recovery (<15%) co-authorship Many users Encourage: move wet lab work to own lab communicate by email: [email protected] stick to protocols use information on website: http://www.microarrays.med.uu.nl follow lab rules (and ask if in doubt) Goal Make microarray technology available in Utrecht so that many groups can publish high quality studies Are (technically) high quality studies possible? Comparing functionally related mutants Srb/mediator complex (conserved yeast – mammals) 24 subunits associated with RNA polymerase II involved in regulation of transcription Role of different subunits in yeast? CDK-Cyclin Tail Head Middle Experiment design All hybridisations with common wild-type reference RNA Each deletion strain grown in duplicate - dye swap on two arrays - genes in duplicate: 4 data points per gene per deletion Additional wild-type controls grown alongside each deletion strain - biological and technical variation SRB2 deletion MED3 deletion Array#1 Array#2 mt1 cy5 wt ref cy5 wt ref cy3 mt2 cy3 Array#1 Array#2 mt1 cy5 wt ref cy5 wt ref cy3 mt2 cy3 16 mutants etc. WT controls Array#1 Array#2 wt1 cy5 wt ref cy5 wt ref cy3 wt2 cy3 6 wt controls Select for genes significantly changed in any deletion but not in same vs same, wt controls Are (technically) high quality studies possible? Yes! (but requires discipline) Rejected experiments: Total RNA and mRNA isolation deviated Label incorporation deviated Hybridisations heterogeneous, weak or too much background Parallel wt controls not similar Chromosomal abberations Duplo’s not similar Not strictly necessary for all microarray experiments (e.g. screens) But still recommended Such comparative studies are not restricted to yeast Analysis of head-neck tumors (in collaboration with dept. Pathology) Comparative studies (and screens) Require strict attention to experimental detail Standardized arrays and protocols Controls to generate estimates of variation Enough data per gene/sample, including dye swap QC of RNA, labeled material and hybs Also requires analysis tools and collaborations Srb/Mediator Jeroen van de Peppel Nienke Kettelarij _ HNSCC Paul Roepman Piet Slootweg (Pathology) Marcel Tilanus (Pathology) Exit from stationary phase SP 15 60 180 360 min Microarray technology Dik van Leenen Tony Miles Marian Groot-Koerkamp Joop van Helvoort Genes SP 15 60 180 360 min ... External controls & cell count