Comment on and reply to "Analysis of variation of amplitudes in cell cycle gene expression" by Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger: On the analysis of gene expression during the normal, eukaryotic, cell cycle

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The paper of Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger on gene expression during the division cycle of HeLa cells using the data of Whitfield et al. are discussed in order to see whether their analysis is related to gene expression during the divisio...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Cooper Stephen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2005-11-01
Series:Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling
Online Access:http://www.tbiomed.com/content/2/1/47
id doaj-a824f99c5d064c7b92e51b5f263735fb
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a824f99c5d064c7b92e51b5f263735fb2020-11-24T20:54:28ZengBMCTheoretical Biology and Medical Modelling1742-46822005-11-01214710.1186/1742-4682-2-47Comment on and reply to "Analysis of variation of amplitudes in cell cycle gene expression" by Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger: On the analysis of gene expression during the normal, eukaryotic, cell cycleCooper Stephen<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The paper of Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger on gene expression during the division cycle of HeLa cells using the data of Whitfield et al. are discussed in order to see whether their analysis is related to gene expression during the division cycle.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The results of Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger demonstrate that different inhibition methods proposed to "synchronize" cells lead to different levels of gene expression. This result, in and of itself, should be taken as evidence that the original work of Whitfield et al. is flawed and should not be used to support the notion that the cells studied were synchronized or that the microarray analyses identify cell-cycle-regulated genes. Furthermore, the DNA content evidence presented by Whitfield et al. supports the proposal that the cells described as 'synchronized' are not synchronized. A comparison of the gene expression amplitudes from two different experiments indicates that the results are not reproducible.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>It is concluded that the analysis of Liu, Gaido, and Wolfinger is problematic because their work assumes that the cells they analyze are or were synchronized. The very fact that different inhibition methods lead to different degrees of gene expression should be taken as additional evidence that the experiments should be viewed skeptically rather than accepted as an approach to understanding gene expression during the cell cycle.</p> http://www.tbiomed.com/content/2/1/47
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Cooper Stephen
spellingShingle Cooper Stephen
Comment on and reply to "Analysis of variation of amplitudes in cell cycle gene expression" by Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger: On the analysis of gene expression during the normal, eukaryotic, cell cycle
Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling
author_facet Cooper Stephen
author_sort Cooper Stephen
title Comment on and reply to "Analysis of variation of amplitudes in cell cycle gene expression" by Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger: On the analysis of gene expression during the normal, eukaryotic, cell cycle
title_short Comment on and reply to "Analysis of variation of amplitudes in cell cycle gene expression" by Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger: On the analysis of gene expression during the normal, eukaryotic, cell cycle
title_full Comment on and reply to "Analysis of variation of amplitudes in cell cycle gene expression" by Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger: On the analysis of gene expression during the normal, eukaryotic, cell cycle
title_fullStr Comment on and reply to "Analysis of variation of amplitudes in cell cycle gene expression" by Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger: On the analysis of gene expression during the normal, eukaryotic, cell cycle
title_full_unstemmed Comment on and reply to "Analysis of variation of amplitudes in cell cycle gene expression" by Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger: On the analysis of gene expression during the normal, eukaryotic, cell cycle
title_sort comment on and reply to "analysis of variation of amplitudes in cell cycle gene expression" by liu, gaido and wolfinger: on the analysis of gene expression during the normal, eukaryotic, cell cycle
publisher BMC
series Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling
issn 1742-4682
publishDate 2005-11-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The paper of Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger on gene expression during the division cycle of HeLa cells using the data of Whitfield et al. are discussed in order to see whether their analysis is related to gene expression during the division cycle.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The results of Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger demonstrate that different inhibition methods proposed to "synchronize" cells lead to different levels of gene expression. This result, in and of itself, should be taken as evidence that the original work of Whitfield et al. is flawed and should not be used to support the notion that the cells studied were synchronized or that the microarray analyses identify cell-cycle-regulated genes. Furthermore, the DNA content evidence presented by Whitfield et al. supports the proposal that the cells described as 'synchronized' are not synchronized. A comparison of the gene expression amplitudes from two different experiments indicates that the results are not reproducible.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>It is concluded that the analysis of Liu, Gaido, and Wolfinger is problematic because their work assumes that the cells they analyze are or were synchronized. The very fact that different inhibition methods lead to different degrees of gene expression should be taken as additional evidence that the experiments should be viewed skeptically rather than accepted as an approach to understanding gene expression during the cell cycle.</p>
url http://www.tbiomed.com/content/2/1/47
work_keys_str_mv AT cooperstephen commentonandreplytoanalysisofvariationofamplitudesincellcyclegeneexpressionbyliugaidoandwolfingerontheanalysisofgeneexpressionduringthenormaleukaryoticcellcycle
_version_ 1716794423242653696