AEM
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental material
Right arrow Other Versions of this Article:
AEM.02536-07v1
74/10/2957    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by He, Z.
Right arrow Articles by Zhou, J.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by He, Z.
Right arrow Articles by Zhou, J.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by He, Z.
Right arrow Articles by Zhou, J.
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, May 2008, p. 2957-2966, Vol. 74, No. 10
0099-2240/08/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/AEM.02536-07
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Empirical Evaluation of a New Method for Calculating Signal-to-Noise Ratio for Microarray Data Analysis{triangledown} ,{dagger}

Zhili He and Jizhong Zhou*

Institute for Environmental Genomics, Department of Botany and Microbiology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73019

Received 10 November 2007/ Accepted 6 March 2008

Signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) thresholds for microarray data analysis were experimentally determined with an oligonucleotide array that contained perfect-match (PM) and mismatch (MM) probes based upon four genes from Shewanella oneidensis MR-1. A new SNR calculation, called the signal-to-both-standard-deviations ratio (SSDR), was developed and evaluated, along with other two methods, the signal-to-standard-deviation ratio (SSR) and the signal-to-background ratio (SBR). At a low stringency, the thresholds of the SSR, SBR, and SSDR were 2.5, 1.60, and 0.80 with an oligonucleotide and a PCR amplicon as target templates and 2.0, 1.60, and 0.70 with genomic DNAs as target templates. Slightly higher thresholds were obtained under high-stringency conditions. The thresholds of the SSR and SSDR decreased with an increase in the complexity of targets (e.g., target types) and the presence of background DNA and a decrease in the compositions of targets, while the SBR remained unchanged in all situations. The lowest percentage of false positives and false negatives was observed with the SSDR calculation method, suggesting that it may be a better SNR calculation for more accurate determination of SNR thresholds. Positive spots identified by SNR thresholds were verified by the Student t test, and consistent results were observed. This study provides general guidance for users to select appropriate SNR thresholds for different samples under different hybridization conditions.


* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Institute for Environmental Genomics, Department of Botany and Microbiology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019. Phone: (405) 325-6073. Fax: (405) 325-7552. E-mail: jzhou{at}ou.edu

{triangledown} Published ahead of print on 14 March 2008.

{dagger} Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://aem.asm.org/.


Applied and Environmental Microbiology, May 2008, p. 2957-2966, Vol. 74, No. 10
0099-2240/08/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/AEM.02536-07
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.







Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
J. Bacteriol. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. Eukaryot. Cell All ASM Journals

Copyright © 2008 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.