The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Normalization of qRT-PCR data: the necessity of adopting a systematic, experimental conditions-specific, validation of references
Abstract
Quantitative RT-PCR (reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, also known as qRT-PCR or real-time RT-PCR) has been used in large proportions of transcriptome analyses published to date. The accuracy of the results obtained by this method strongly depends on accurate transcript normalization using stably expressed genes, known as references. Statistical algorithms have been developed recently to help validate reference genes but, surprisingly, this robust approach is under-utilized in plants. Instead, putative 'housekeeping' genes tend to be used as references without any proper validation. The concept of normalization in transcript quantification is introduced here and the factors affecting its reliability in qRT-PCR are discussed in an attempt to convince molecular biologists, and non-specialists, that systematic validation of reference genes is essential for producing accurate, reliable data in qRT-PCR analyses, and thus should be an integral component of them.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Quantitative real-time RT-PCR – a perspective
Bustin, S. A., Benes, V, Nolan, T., & Pfaffl, M. W. (2005) · Journal of Molecular Endocrinology · doi:10.1677/jme.1.01755 · Cited by 1,321
Cited by
Li, J., Han, D., Wang, D., Ning, K., Jia, J., Wei, L., Jing, X., Huang, S., Chen, J., Li, Y., et al. (2014) · The Plant Cell · doi:10.1105/tpc.113.121418 · Cited by 412
Park, S.-C., Kim, Y.-H., Ji, C. Y., Park, S., Jeong, J. C., Lee, H.-S., & Kwak, S.-S. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0051502 · Cited by 160
Osaki, M., Kosaka, N., Okada, F., & Ochiya, T. (2014) · Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy · doi:10.1007/s40291-013-0065-0 · Cited by 13
The dynamics of telomere length in primary and metastatic colorectal cancer lesions
Kroupa, M., Kubecek, O., Tomasova, K., Hanak, P., Krupova, M., Cervena, K., Siskova, A., Rosendorf, J., Hosek, P., Vodickova, L., et al. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-35835-9 · Cited by 10
Shimada, H., Obayashi, T., Takahashi, N., Matsui, M., & Sakamoto, A. (2010) · Plant Methods · doi:10.1186/1746-4811-6-29 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Guenin, S., Mauriat, M., Pelloux, J., Van Wuytswinkel, O., Bellini, C., & Gutierrez, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Botany
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2009-01-06
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 487-493
- ISSN
- 0022-0957 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2431
- OpenAlex
- W2110885661
- Cited by
- 596
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Normalization of qRT-PCR data: the necessity of adopting a systematic, experimental conditions-specific, validation of references. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jxb/ern305
- The paper
- Guenin, S., Mauriat, M., Pelloux, J., Van Wuytswinkel, O., Bellini, C., & Gutierrez, L. (2009). Normalization of qRT-PCR data: the necessity of adopting a systematic, experimental conditions-specific, validation of references. Journal of Experimental Botany. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ern305
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.