Skip Navigation


Bioinformatics Advance Access originally published online on April 7, 2005
Bioinformatics 2005 21(12):2803-2804; doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bti428
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (Print PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/12/2803    most recent
bti428v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dobbin, K. K.
Right arrow Articles by Simon, R. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dobbin, K. K.
Right arrow Articles by Simon, R. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org

Comment on ‘Evaluation of the gene-specific dye bias in cDNA microarray experiments’

Kevin K. Dobbin *, Joanna H. Shih and Richard M. Simon

Biometric Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health Bethesda, MD, USA

*To whom correspondence should be addressed.

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

In their paper in Bioinformatics, Martin-Magniette et al. (2005) recommend complete dye-swap1 designs for both direct and indirect dual label microarray experiments. These recommendations contradict our previous recommendations (Dobbin et al., 2003) for designing experiments, where we suggested minimizing or eliminating the use of dye-swap arrays. We show here that the recommendations of Martin-Magniette et al. are fundamentally flawed, and that in most realistic situations performing extensive dye-swap arrays results in a poor experimental design.

The key error made by these authors is that they focus on over-simplified situations in which only two RNA samples are being compared. There are two problems with this approach. First, if the goal is really just to compare gene expression in two RNA samples, then obviously the best design will be to place aliquots from both samples together on each array and label each sample with each dye . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 BloodHome page
I. C. Macaulay, M. R. Tijssen, D. C. Thijssen-Timmer, A. Gusnanto, M. Steward, P. Burns, C. F. Langford, P. D. Ellis, F. Dudbridge, J.-J. Zwaginga, et al.
Comparative gene expression profiling of in vitro differentiated megakaryocytes and erythroblasts identifies novel activatory and inhibitory platelet membrane proteins
Blood, April 15, 2007; 109(8): 3260 - 3269.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 GeneticsHome page
J. Fu and R. C. Jansen
Optimal Design and Analysis of Genetic Studies on Gene Expression
Genetics, March 1, 2006; 172(3): 1993 - 1999.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]