Cited by 3,043Molecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsGene expression and cancer classificationClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control

Amplification efficiency: linking baseline and bias in the analysis of quantitative PCR data

Open access
Ruijter, J. M., Ramakers, C., Hoogaars, W. M. H., Karlen, Y., Bakker, O., van den Hoff, M. J. B., Moorman, A. F. M.·2009·Nucleic Acids Research

Abstract

Despite the central role of quantitative PCR (qPCR) in the quantification of mRNA transcripts, most analyses of qPCR data are still delegated to the software that comes with the qPCR apparatus. This is especially true for the handling of the fluorescence baseline. This article shows that baseline estimation errors are directly reflected in the observed PCR efficiency values and are thus propagated exponentially in the estimated starting concentrations as well as 'fold-difference' results. Because of the unknown origin and kinetics of the baseline fluorescence, the fluorescence values monitored in the initial cycles of the PCR reaction cannot be used to estimate a useful baseline value. An algorithm that estimates the baseline by reconstructing the log-linear phase downward from the early plateau phase of the PCR reaction was developed and shown to lead to very reproducible PCR efficiency values. PCR efficiency values were determined per sample by fitting a regression line to a subset of data points in the log-linear phase. The variability, as well as the bias, in qPCR results was significantly reduced when the mean of these PCR efficiencies per amplicon was used in the calculation of an estimate of the starting concentration per sample.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/nar/gkp045

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ruijter, J. M., Ramakers, C., Hoogaars, W. M. H., Karlen, Y., Bakker, O., van den Hoff, M. J. B., & Moorman, A. F. M.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Maastricht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Ruijter, J. M.
Venue
Nucleic Acids Research
Published
2009-02-22
Volume
37
Issue
6
Pages
e45-e45
ISSN
  • 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-4962
OpenAlex
W2136309995
Cited by
3,043
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 113 · 2025: 136 · 2024: 140 · 2023: 156 · 2022: 194 · 2021: 291 · 2020: 271 · 2019: 235 · 2018: 225 · 2017: 196 · 2016: 216 · 2015: 205 · 2014: 164 · 2013: 158 · 2012: 139
FWCI
45.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nucleic Acids Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • European Commission
  • Universiteit Leiden
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Keywords
real-time PCR, PCR efficiency, baseline estimation, mRNA quantification
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Animals, Chick Embryo, Fluorescence, Linear Models, Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction

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