Current Practices for Reference Gene Selection in RT-qPCR of Aspergillus: Outlook and Recommendations for the Future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aspergillus is a genus of filamentous fungi with vast geographic and ecological distributions. Species within this genus are clinically, agriculturally and biotechnologically relevant, leading to increasing interest in elucidating gene expression dynamics of key metabolic and physiological processes. Reverse-transcription quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-qPCR) is a sensitive and specific method of quantifying gene expression. A crucial step for comparing RT-qPCR results between strains and experimental conditions is normalisation to experimentally validated reference gene(s). In this review, we provide a critical analysis of current reference gene selection and validation practices for RT-qPCR gene expression analyses of Aspergillus. Of 90 primary research articles obtained through our PubMed query, 17 experimentally validated the reference gene(s) used. Twenty reference genes were used across the 90 studies, with beta-tubulin being the most used reference gene, followed by actin, 18S rRNA and glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase. Sixteen of the 90 studies used multiple reference genes for normalisation. Failing to experimentally validate the stability of reference genes can lead to conflicting results, as was the case for four studies. Overall, our review highlights the need to experimentally validate reference genes in RT-qPCR studies of Aspergillus.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".