Abstract
Realtime quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) data are found to display periodic patterns in the fluorescence intensity as a function of sample number for fixed cycle number. This behavior is seen for technical replicate datasets recorded on several different commercial instruments; it occurs in the baseline region and typically increases with increasing cycle number in the growth and plateau regions. Autocorrelation analysis reveals periodicities of 12 for 96well systems and 24 for a 384well system, indicating a correlation with block architecture. Passive dye experiments show that the effect may be from optical detector bias. Importantly, the signal periodicity manifests as periodicity in quantification cycle (C_{q}) values when these are estimated by the widely applied fixed threshold approach, but not when scaleinsensitive markers like first and secondderivative maxima are used. Accordingly, any scale variability in the growth curves will lead to bias in constantthresholdbased C_{q}s, making it mandatory that workers should either use scaleinsensitive C_{q}s or normalize their growth curves to constant amplitude before applying the constant threshold method.
Introduction
Quantitative realtime polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) is the most widely applied molecular biology laboratory technique for gene expression analysis^{1}. In addition to an accurate experimental design and a sensitive workflow^{2}, qPCR data analysis constitutes a crucial step. To date, a plethora of algorithms has been developed for absolute and relative quantitation of qPCR data. The goal of these algorithms is the estimation of initial template fluorescence (F_{0}) and copy number (N_{0}). Most methods accomplish this in one of two ways: by estimating the amplification efficiency E as well as quantification cycle C_{q} and applying these two estimates to the basic exponential growth equation, or by fitting mechanistic models of PCR kinetics. In the former approaches, E is assumed constant up to C_{q} and is estimated by calibration curve analysis^{3} or from single curve fitting^{4,5,6,7,8}. The mechanistic models avoid the calculation of E and C_{q} in directly estimating F_{0}^{9,10,11}, but they do so by tacitly setting E = 2 throughout the baseline region^{12}.
The baseline region is commonly defined as the early cycles up to the point when the amplification curve rises detectably above the background fluorescence level. For reliable quantification, the raw fluorescence values F_{i} of the amplification curves need to be levelled to the yaxis origin, a process termed “baselining”. Common approaches are to calculate an averaged^{15,16,17}, iteratively estimated^{13,14}, or lower asymptotederived value F_{base}^{5,6,8} from the baseline region (e.g. F_{1…10}) and then subtract this value from all fluorescence values prior to parameter estimation. Consequently, most of the published quantification algorithms conduct this data transformation^{18}, along with other preprocessing steps such as smoothing or filtering^{19}.
The above definition states the familiar display of signal F_{i} vs. cycle number i for a given reaction. However, with the widespread use of multireaction qPCR instruments, there is a second way to examine the fluorescence: by displaying the fluorescence values of all samples k at a fixed cycle i, e.g. F_{10} in sample 1, F_{10} in sample 2, …. F_{10} in sample k. This is exemplified in Fig. 1A and B: the black boxes denote F_{10}, F_{20} and F_{40} for all 379 samples of a published technical replicate dataset.
We recently showed preliminary results^{20} for such an examination of a published large scale technical replicate dataset^{18} that revealed a pronounced regular and periodic pattern in the betweensample fluorescence signals for both early and late fixed cycle numbers. Subsequently, we have observed similar periodicity in many technical replicate datasets recorded with other qPCR platforms. Here, we employed autocorrelation analysis, a technique from the field of time series analysis that can reveal regularly occurring patterns in onedimensional data. By this means, we have uncovered a periodicity of 24/12 in the qPCR raw data of 384/96well microtiter plate systems that clearly corresponds to the plate architecture and/or optical readout technology. This effect occurs at all cycle numbers and is typically stronger for cycles in the growth and plateau regions, so that the classical “baselining” fails to remove periodicities beyond the baseline region.
When C_{q} values are obtained using fixed threshold methods, the persisting plateau periodicity propagates exactly, hence resulting in periodic C_{q} values. However, this effect pertains to any systematic plateau phase scattering, periodic or not, making quantitation methods mandatory that are not directly influenced by the magnitude of the plateau phase. Interestingly, first and secondderivative maxima methods^{4,8} are a viable choice because they are mathematically scaleindependent and deliver random, nonperiodic C_{q} values in the presence of periodic plateau phases. These findings lead to the simple conclusion to completely refrain from thresholdbased qPCR quantitation.
To this end, we have developed a web application for users to examine their own qPCR data with respect to periodic and other nonrandom patterns.
Results
Periodicities in published and own technical replicate qPCR data
In a recent study^{20}, we demonstrated periodic patterns in raw fluorescence values at cycles 1 and 45 of the ‘94replicates4dilutions’ dataset^{18}. A closer inspection of the ‘380replicates’ dataset in Ruijter et al.^{18} revealed that the raw fluorescence values (Fig. 1A) are dispersed within a highly variable window of magnitudes (baseline region: 4000–5500, plateau region: 9000–15000). When F_{10} is plotted for all 379 samples, an added Loess smoothing line uncovers a clearly periodic pattern of the fluorescence values (Fig. 1C). After baselining the data with a linear model of F_{1…10} (Fig. 1B), the periodic pattern in F_{10} is completely removed and the fluorescence values exhibit a randomlike pattern (Fig. 1D). However, for fluorescence values at later cycles, such as F_{20} in the exponential growth region (Fig. 1E) or F_{40} in the plateau region (Fig. 1F), the same periodic pattern is evident, showing that baselining does not compensate for intrinsic patterns beyond the baseline region. The same periodic pattern is present in each cycle of the data from the exponential phase onwards without exception. These observations indicate that there is periodic scale variability in the data, as otherwise baselining would correct the whole curve for periodicity.
To further investigate these findings on other qPCR systems, we generated five additional replicate datasets that differed in amplicon (VIM, GAPDH, S27), chemistry (SybrGreen I, EvaGreen), and qPCR instrument (CFX96, Rotorgene, iQ5, StepOne, LC96). We then used our developed analysis pipeline based on autocorrelation analysis (Fig. 2, see also Material & Methods) to uncover putative periodicities intrinsic to these datasets, including the ‘380replicates’ dataset^{18}. The latter, corresponding with the observations in Fig. 1, exhibits strong periodicity of ~24 that manifests in a distinct correlogram pattern (Fig. 3, top left). In this case, the Runs test for nonrandomness and LjungBox test for autocorrelation are highly significant. Strong periodicities (Fig. 3) were also detectable for the ‘VIM CFX96’ and ‘GAPDH StepOne’ datasets, both with a period ~12–13, while ‘S27 Rotorgene’, ‘VIM iQ5’ and ‘GAPDH LC96’ displayed negligible systematic patterns (with insignificant nonrandomness tests for the latter two).
The results from these five datasets suggest that strong periodicity is associated with some, but not all (i.e., not iQ5 or LC96) blockbased systems.
Propagation of plateau phase periodicities to Cq values
We next investigated the effect of periodic fluorescence on the estimation of threshold (C_{t}) and SDM (C_{qSDM})based Cq values for the ‘380replicates’ dataset. The rationale is that baselined periodic fluorescence F_{i,k} over all samples k at a fixed cycle i implies periodic threshold cycle values C_{t} at fixed threshold fluorescence F_{t} by propagation through the inverse function, from the following mathematical considerations:
Suppose a sigmoidal function such as a fourparameter sigmoidal model,
is fitted to qPCR data, and C_{t} values are estimated by the corresponding inverse function at threshold fluorescence F_{t},
Then, an increasing parameter d (upper asymptote) decreases C_{t} as the second term increases (b being negative, e being the first derivative maximum cycle). Indeed, estimated C_{t} values for the ‘380replicates’ set at F_{t} = 500 (exponential region) exhibit strong periodicity (Fig. 4A) with exactly the same pattern as the fluorescence values for this dataset in Fig. 3.
As the overall scale of the qPCR curves drives the periodicity (it is strongest in the plateau phase, compare Fig. 1F), these results recommend the application of a scaleindependent C_{q} marker to neutralize such effects. The SDM is a viable choice because of the following: a SDMbased C_{qSDM} value corresponds to the cycle number x, where the third derivative of (1),
has the positive zero root
and is therefore scaleinsensitive as both the parameters for lower asymptote c and upper asymptote d are cancelled out. The same accounts for the firstderivative maximum (not shown). Hence, C_{qSDM} is mathematically and physically decoupled from an overall periodic scaling of the fluorescence values. This paradigm is confirmed by the actual results: The C_{qSDM} values of the ‘380replicates’ dataset are random and nonperiodic (Fig. 4B; Runs test and LjungBox test are insignificant).
We then analysed a further technical replicate dataset consisting of seven 10fold dilutions with 12 replicates each^{34}, which was previously created with the widely used Lightcycler 480 system. The raw qPCR fluorescence values were fitted with a fiveparameter sigmoidal model^{8,24}, C_{t} values estimated, rescaled into the interval [0, 1] (as a consequence of the C_{t} value shifting in the dilution steps) and finally interrogated by autocorrelation analysis (Supplemental Fig. 3). Interestingly, a clear periodicity in the rescaled C_{t} values with a period of 12 is evident, demonstrating that periodic patterns can be extracted from replicate dilution series after rescaling and that this system delivers periodic data.
A potential alternative to using scaleinsensitive C_{q} methods is to rescale all curves to the same final fluorescence magnitude before using thresholdbased C_{t} estimation. This normalization approach was initially advocated by Larionov and coworkers^{26}, who demonstrated improved standard curve regression statistics after such normalization. Indeed, normalizing the fluorescence values within the interval [0, 1] has the same effect as SDMbased estimation: all periodicity and nonrandomness in C_{t} values is removed (Fig. 4C), although it appears that normalization does not completely remove intrinsic autocorrelation (LjungBox test pvalue = 0.1). These results also pertain to all other datasets presenting periodicity (data not shown).
Cq value periodicities acquired by published algorithms and vendor’s software
In a next step, we interrogated scalesensitivity and periodicity in published data, where C_{t}/C_{q} values are available from a variety of quantitation methods. We extended these considerations to the C_{q} estimation procedures of the methods compared in Ruijter et al.^{18} by similarly analysing the supplied Cq, E and F_{0} values for the ‘380replicates’ data provided in their supplement. Specifically, we looked for putative periodicity in these parameters obtained from six different qPCR quantitation methods: LinRegPCR, FPKM, DART, FPLM, Miner, and 5PSM (Supplemental File 3). Four of these (LinRegPCR, FPKM, DART and FPLM) deliver periodic C_{q} values, while two (Miner, 5PSM) do not (Supplemental Fig. 1A). The estimated efficiencies exhibit no periodicity (Supplemental Fig. 1B), while the F_{0} values are periodic for LinRegPCR and FPLM (Supplemental Fig. 1C). The F_{0} values from the mechanistic MAK2 model display strong periodicity while the C_{q} values from the Cy0method are random (Supplemental Fig. 1D+E). These observations clearly confirm that methods employing first or secondderivative maxima (Miner, 5PSM, Cy_{0}) yield nonperiodic C_{q} values, which tallies with our results and mathematical derivations. It is also a logical consequence that F_{0} values estimated from F_{0} = F_{q}/E^{Cq}using periodic C_{q}s and nonperiodic Es are likewise periodic. In contrast, all Es are nonperiodic, or only slightly periodic, when calculated by E = F(C_{t})/F(C_{t} − 1) and both nominator and denominator exhibit the same periodicity (albeit with a shift of one cycle). A potential cause for the lack of periodicity in SDMbased methods could be an increased dispersion (variance) of C_{q} values which obfuscates any periodic patterns. We therefore reanalysed the different C_{q} quantification methods from Ruijter et al.^{18} with respect to the dispersion of their calculated C_{q} values (Supplemental Fig. 1F). We found that the three SDMbased methods (Cy_{0}, Miner, 5PSM) deliver C_{q} values with lower dispersion, which manifests in narrower boxplot boxes (in blue) and lower coefficients of variation (c.v., in blue). These results are not surprising as they constitute a reevaluation of similar C_{q} dispersion results (compare Figure 6B in Ruijter et al.^{18}) and tally with the observations from a replicate dilution set (compare Fig. 3 in Tellinghuisen & Spiess^{20}). Moreover, they should largely be a consequence of the already mentioned decreased sensitivity of these three SDMbased methods to the overall plateau phase scattering.
As the above data were fitted with authordeveloped algorithms, we inspected whether Cq values also exhibit periodicity when obtained from the actual output of qPCR system analysis software. Indeed, using the ‘VIM.CFX96’ data to calculate Cq values by the CFX Manager™ software, we observed highly periodic Cq values from both supplied quantitation methods, “Manual threshold” and “Nonlinear regression” (Supplemental Fig. 2).
Effect of periodic Cq values on calibration curvederived efficiency and copy number estimation
The presence of periodic Cq values is likely to entail a quantification bias that depends on the location of the selected Cq values within the periodic pattern. To address the question on how large this selection bias can be, we conducted an iterative analysis on the ‘94replicates4dilutions’ dataset^{18}. We previously demonstrated that this dataset also exhibits extensive periodicity in fluorescence values^{20}. Similar to the ‘380replicates’ dataset analysed in this work, a fixed threshold estimation of the lowest dilution set (15000 copies) at F_{t} = 500 results in 94 periodic C_{t} values (Supplemental Fig. 4A). Using all combinations of the two most extreme C_{t} values of the lowest (15000 copies) and highest (15 copies) dilution as well as all 94 C_{t} values of the two intermediate dilutions (1500 and 150 copies), we created 34968 linear regressions for calibrationbased absolute quantitation (Supplemental Fig. 4B). Efficiencies calculated from the slopes of the regression curves were spread within a window of 1.79 to 2.19 (Supplemental Fig. 4C), while copy numbers estimated at C_{t} = 30 varied from 28 to 86 (Supplemental Fig. 4D). These findings demonstrate that i) efficiency estimation is highly dependent on the combination of C_{t} values used for constructing the regression curve and ii) estimated copy numbers for unknowns must be viewed with caution as they can spread over a large interval.
Factors contributing to qPCR periodicities
In principle, at least three factors could contribute to such periodicity effects: i) uneven thermal distribution of the Peltier block system, resulting in welltowell differences in E, which in turn influence the amount of amplicon formation, ii) bias and heterogeneity of the optical detection system and iii) pipetting induced patterns, e.g. from uneven and tipdependent deposition with multichannel pipettes. The first of these cannot account for the observed periodicity in the baseline fluorescence, where there is negligible signal from the amplicons. To address sources ii) and iii), we performed a simple experiment in which qPCR mastermixes without template, but containing SybrGreen, ROX or 150 nM OligodT_{20}Cy5, were cycled and scanned in the corresponding channels (Fig. 5). The deposition of the mastermix in all 96 wells was conducted with a singlechannel pipettor in order to avoid any periodic volume differences (source iii). We selected the CFX96 (Biorad) system because of its strong periodicity in fluorescence values during qPCR amplification (Fig. 3). Even in the absence of amplification, ROX (Fig. 5A), Cy5 (Fig. 5C) and to a lesser extent SYBR Green (Fig. 5B), displayed for cycles 1, 10 and 20 periodic fluorescence patterns that were highly similar. These results support source ii)  optical detection effects  as the primary source of the periodicity, consistent with the same being responsible for overall scale variability in the amplification profiles.
Discussion
qPCR amplification profiles commonly display significant variability in their intensity scale. Using autocorrelation analysis, we have shown that for many blockbased instruments, such effects are periodic in the sample number even after baselining, leading to similar periodicity in thresholdbased estimates of the quantification cycle C_{q}. The observed periodicities of ~12 for 96well block systems and ~24 for a 384well system suggest a correlation with block architecture (number of columns). Our passive dye experiments indicate that this effect is very likely due to optical detector bias, however positional block temperature effects on dye fluorescence magnitude may also play a role^{33}. Due to fluorescence periodicity in the absence of any DNA template, we rule out possible influences on qPCR amplification efficiency, as proposed for positional bias in C_{q} and meltingcurvederived T_{m} values^{21,22,29}. The periodicity of ROX fluorescence suggests  as is a widely applied procedure  to normalize SybrGreen fluorescence by ROX fluorescence through F_{i,k}(SYBR)/F_{i,k}(ROX). Conducting this approach for the ‘VIM.CFX96’ data with the corresponding ROX fluorescence at Cycle 20 certainly decreases the magnitude of observed periodicities (Fig. 5D, lower panel) from a range of [−100, 100] to [−0.02, 0.02], however the periodicity as such persists. In addition, we have observed a decrease in ROX fluorescence during cycling (Supplemental File 4), which may pose a problem for this approach. At this point it must be emphasized that we discovered highly periodic Cq values obtained from hardware systems that state to have an optical detection system which eliminates the need to use passive reference dyes, such as the CFX96 (Biorad) system (compare vendor’s info^{32}). Finally, positional differences in qPCR efficiency would likely result in positiondependent amplicon yield. In another experiment (data not shown), we found no correlation between F_{max} and amplicon yield (as obtained from capillary electrophoresis), similar to other’s observations^{26}. While heterogeneity in the robotic pipetting systems might also play a role^{27,28}, this cannot explain the periodicity when we used a singlechannel pipette to charge the wells. A most plausible explanation may be found in the different optical architectures of the qPCR systems. However, to this end, we do not feel entitled to give an undisputed explanation on which optical factors (e.g. spherical aberration of the lens/mirror system or “optical vignetting” in the fieldofview periphery) drive periodicity. For instance, blockbased systems that did not show such effects (iQ5 and LC96) conduct simultaneous optical measurements of all samples (CCD camera and perwell fibre optics, respectively), instead of acquiring signals through a columnwise scanning optical shuttle (CFX384, CFX96, StepOne). On the other hand, another CCD camera/mirror system (LC480) clearly exhibited periodicity, such that a fixed scanning architecture is not necessarily devoid of delivering periodic fluorescence readouts.
These detection bias effects are clearly undesirable, and it must be recognized that their effects on C_{q} can be completely eliminated by using a scaleinsensitive definition for C_{q} (e.g., SDM, Cy0, relative threshold) or by normalizing the data to constant scale^{26}. For the latter case, it is necessary to record data well into the plateau region, or to use a wholecurve fitting method that reliably estimates the plateau. Many vendors include an SDM option for C_{q} in their software, but the virtues of this and other scaleinsensitive C_{q} markers over C_{t} have been underappreciated. It is further worth noting that the first two approaches also neutralize effects of true variability in the amplicon yield from random cycletocycle variation in the amplification efficiency^{30}. Most importantly, the observed periodicity, while interesting in itself, is merely an indicator that any kind of scale variability, periodic or random, propagates into thresholdbased C_{t} values. Consequently, the widespread application of fixed thresholdbased quantitation is highly questionable, although it is established as the most commonly used qPCR quantification method. We see various reasons for this: a) it was the first method introduced and implemented in vendors’ software during the dawn of qPCR technology, so that scientists might perceive it as robust and welltested, b) it seems more intuitive and familiar to base the analysis on a single fixed parameter, similar to other analytic methods, c) unawareness of scale effects on fixed location indices in a sigmoidal curve, and d) lack of implementation in some qPCR software.
We advise researchers to use our approach to examine their qPCR data for periodicity, as this problem appears to be unacknowledged by the instrument vendors. To the best of our knowledge, none of the existing and previously reviewed qPCR software^{31} can identify periodic patterns in qPCR data. Our web application, www.smorfland.uni.wroc.pl/shiny/period_app/, fills this gap, making it easy for users to examine their data for periodic and other nonrandom patterns (more details in Supplemental Fig. 5).
Materials and Methods
Datasets
For the analysis of periodicity in this work, we have employed one published 384reaction technical replicate dataset (‘380replicates’^{18}) and five new 72 to 96reaction technical replicate datasets, obtained with different amplicons, qPCR hardware systems, and detection chemistries^{23}. The parameters were as follows for the new datasets (gene; forward primer; reverse primer; qPCR instrument; detection chemistry; cycling parameters; primer concentration; amplification chemistry):
‘S27’: Ribosomal protein S27; aacatgcctctcgcaaagga; tgtgcatggctaaagaccgt; Qiagen Rotorgene; SybrGreen I; 95 °C 2′ = > (95 °C 10”, 60 °C 20”, 72 °C 30”) × 40, 0.2 μM, Takara ExTaq.
‘VIM.CFX96’: human Vimentin; cccttgacattgagattgcc; ccagattagtttccctcaggt; Biorad CFX96; EvaGreen; 95 °C 10′ = > (95 °C 30”, 59 °C 45”, 68 °C 45”) × 40, 0.2 μM, LifeTechnologies Maxima qPCR Kit.
‘VIM.iQ5’: human Vimentin; cccttgacattgagattgcc; ccagattagtttccctcaggt; Biorad iQ5; EvaGreen; 95 °C 10′ => (95 °C 30”, 59 °C 45”, 68 °C 45”) × 40, 0.2 μM, LifeTechnologies Maxima qPCR Kit.
‘GAPDH.StepOne’: Glycerinaldehyd3phosphatDehydrogenase; Assay Hs02758991_g1; LifeTechnologies StepOne Plus; TaqMan; 50 °C 2′, 95 °C 10′ => (95 °C 15”, 60 °C 60”) × 40; primer concentrations proprietary; Thermo Scientific Maxima Probe qPCR Master Mix.
‘GAPDH.LC96’: Glycerinaldehyd3phosphatDehydrogenase; Assay Hs02758991_g1; Roche Lightcycler 96; TaqMan; 50 °C 2′, 95 °C 10′ = > (95 °C 15”, 60 °C 60”) × 40; primer concentrations proprietary; Thermo Scientific Maxima Probe qPCR Master Mix.
Raw fluorescence data for these datasets are supplied in Supplemental File 1. All amplicons have been sizechecked by capillary gel electrophoresis (Bioanalyzer, Agilent).
Data transformations
When indicated, curves were fitted either with a fiveparameter asymmetric model^{8} or with an interpolating cubic spline (details below). Baseline subtraction prior to fitting was conducted using a linear model of the form F_{cor.i} = F_{i} − (ax_{i} + b), with a and b obtained from linear regression of the first ten cycles. Normalisation to [0, 1] was performed by transformation with {F_{i} − min(F)}/{max(F) − min(F)}, where max(F) and min(F) are the maximum and minimum fluorescence value of all F_{i}, respectively.
Autocorrelation analysis
The principle approach used in this work is as follows: Using either raw fluorescence values F_{i} at a selected cycle number i, or C_{q} values estimated at a defined fluorescence threshold level F_{Cq} (Fig. 2A), we fit a quadratic model of the form to the data (Fig. 2B). The rationale behind this approach is our observation of curvature and slope in F_{i} and C_{q} values with statistically significant quadratic coefficients. A Loess smoother with a span of 0.1 is then employed on the residuals R_{i} = y_{i} − of the fit for the single purpose of an initial visualization of periodic patterns (Fig. 2C). A WaldWolfowitz (Runs) test and a LjungBox test are applied to the residuals in order to estimate significance of nonrandomness and autocorrelation, respectively. We then use the residuals R_{1}, R_{2}, …. R_{i} from the fit for calculating the autocorrelation r_{k} with lags k = 1, 2, …. n by the following formula:
In a final step (Fig. 2D), we create the correlogram of all autocorrelations r_{k}and use the automatic peak detection R procedure findpeaks to identify the period. The complete pipeline is implemented in the CheckPeriod function of Supplemental File 2.
Estimation of other curve parameters
C_{q} values based on a defined threshold fluorescence F_{t}, in the following termed C_{t}, were estimated by inverse functions of the sigmoidal models. C_{q} values based on secondderivative maxima (C_{qSDM}) were calculated by finding the cycle corresponding to the maximum value of the secondderivative function. In case of fitting with cubic splines, the root of the inverse or thirdderivative of the spline function was employed to estimate C_{t} or C_{qSDM}, respectively.
The maximum fluorescence F_{max} of a curve (“plateau phase”) was based on parameter d (upper asymptote) of a fiveparameter sigmoidal model^{8}.
Computational aspects and reproducibility
All analyses in this work were conducted with the R statistical programming environment (www.rproject.org). The qpcR package^{24} was used for qPCR curve fitting and parameter estimation. To comply with the increasing need for computational reproducibility^{25}, we provide data in Supplemental File 1 and the R script/workspace in Supplemental File 2, from which readers can reproduce all our figures.
Webbased analysis of periodicity in qPCR data
A webbased analysis platform for investigating qPCR periodicity was developed with the Shiny framework for R^{25}. Here the user can upload her/his qPCR data, either fluorescence values at a defined cycle or C_{q} values, and analyse the data with the pipeline given in Fig. 2. The web application is to be found at www.smorfland.uni.wroc.pl/shiny/period_app/. Overview screenshots of this application are given in Supplemental Fig. 5.
Additional Information
How to cite this article: Spiess, A.N. et al. Systemspecific periodicity in quantitative realtime polymerase chain reaction data questions thresholdbased quantitation. Sci. Rep. 6, 38951; doi: 10.1038/srep38951 (2016).
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
Bustin, S. A., Benes, V., Nolan, T. & Pfaffl, M. W. Quantitative realtime RTPCR–a perspective. J Mol Endocrinol 34, 597–601 (2005).
Zeka, F. et al. Straightforward and sensitive RTqPCR based gene expression analysis of FFPE samples. Sci Rep 6, 21418 (2016).
Heid, C. A., Stevens, J., Livak, K. J. & Williams, P. M. Real time quantitative PCR. Genome Res 6, 986–94 (1996).
Rutledge, R. G. Sigmoidal curvefitting redefines quantitative realtime PCR with the prospective of developing automated highthroughput applications. Nucleic Acids Res 32, e178 (2004).
Tichopad, A., Dilger, M., Schwarz, G. & Pfaffl, M. W. Standardized determination of realtime PCR efficiency from a single reaction setup. Nucleic Acids Res 31, e122 (2003).
Peirson, S. N., Butler, J. N. & Foster, R. G. Experimental validation of novel and conventional approaches to quantitative realtime PCR data analysis. Nucleic Acids Res 31, e73 (2003).
Zhao, S. & Fernald, R. D. Comprehensive algorithm for quantitative realtime polymerase chain reaction. J Comput Biol 12, 1047–64 (2005).
Spiess, A. N., Feig, C. & Ritz, C. Highly accurate sigmoidal fitting of realtime PCR data by introducing a parameter for asymmetry. BMC Bioinformatics 9, 221 (2008).
Boggy, G. J. & Woolf, P. J. A mechanistic model of PCR for accurate quantification of quantitative PCR data. PLoS One 5, e12355 (2010).
Carr, A. C. & Moore, S. D. Robust quantification of polymerase chain reactions using global fitting. PLoS One 7, e37640 (2012).
Bultmann, C. A. & Weiskirchen, R. MAKERGAUL: an innovative MAK2based model and software for realtime PCR quantification. Clin Biochem 47, 117–22 (2014).
Tellinghuisen, J. & Spiess, A. N. Statistical uncertainty and its propagation in the analysis of quantitative polymerase chain reaction data. Anal Biochem 464, 94–102 (2014).
Ramakers, C., Ruijter, J. M., Deprez, R. H. & Moorman, A. F. Assumptionfree analysis of quantitative realtime polymerase chain reaction (PCR) data. Neurosci Lett 339, 62–6 (2003).
Ruijter, J. M. et al. Amplification efficiency: linking baseline and bias in the analysis of quantitative PCR data. Nucleic Acids Res 37, e45 (2009).
Lievens, A., Van Aelst, S., Van den Bulcke, M. & Goetghebeur, E. Enhanced analysis of realtime PCR data by using a variable efficiency model: FPKPCR. Nucleic Acids Res 40, e10 (2012).
Rutledge, R. G. A Java program for LREbased realtime qPCR that enables largescale absolute quantification. PLoS One 6, e17636 (2011).
Goll, R., Olsen, T., Cui, G. & Florholmen, J. Evaluation of absolute quantitation by nonlinear regression in probebased realtime PCR. BMC Bioinformatics 7, 107 (2006).
Ruijter, J. M. et al. Evaluation of qPCR curve analysis methods for reliable biomarker discovery: bias, resolution, precision, and implications. Methods 59, 32–46 (2013).
Spiess, A. N. et al. Impact of smoothing on parameter estimation in quantitative DNA amplification experiments. Clin Chem 61, 379–88 (2015).
Tellinghuisen, J. & Spiess, A. N. Comparing realtime quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis methods for precision, linearity, and accuracy of estimating amplification efficiency. Anal Biochem 449, 76–82 (2014).
von Kanel, T., Gerber, D., Wittwer, C. T., Hermann, M. & Gallati, S. Detecting and resolving positiondependent temperature effects in realtime quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Anal Biochem 419, 161–7 (2011).
Wilhelm, J., Hahn, M. & Pingoud, A. Influence of DNA target melting behavior on realtime PCR quantification. Clin Chem 46, 1738–43 (2000).
Rödiger, S., Burdukiewicz, M. & Schierack, P. chipPCR: an R package to preprocess raw data of amplification curves. Bioinformatics 31, 2900–2 (2015).
Ritz, C. & Spiess, A. N. qpcR: an R package for sigmoidal model selection in quantitative realtime polymerase chain reaction analysis. Bioinformatics 24, 1549–51 (2008).
Rödiger, S., Burdukiewicz, M., Blagodatskikh, K. A. & Schierack, P. R as an environment for the Reproducible Analysis of DNA Amplification Experiments. R Journal 7, 127–50 (2015).
Larionov, A., Krause, A. & Miller, W. A standard curve based method for relative real time PCR data processing. BMC Bioinformatics 6, 62 (2005).
Tellinghuisen, J. & Spiess, A. N. Absolute copy number from the statistics of the quantification cycle in replicate quantitative polymerase chain reaction experiments. Anal Chem 87, 1889–95 (2015).
Thomson, E. & Vincent, R. Reagent volume and plate bias in realtime polymerase chain reaction. Anal Biochem 337, 347–50 (2005).
Herrmann, M. G., Durtschi, J. D., Wittwer, C. T. & Voelkerding, K. V. Expanded instrument comparison of amplicon DNA melting analysis for mutation scanning and genotyping. Clin Chem 53, 1544–8 (2007).
Tellinghuisen, J. & Spiess, A. N. Bias and imprecision in analysis of realtime quantitative polymerase chain reaction data. Anal Chem 87, 8925–8931 (2015).
Pabinger, S., Rödiger, S., Kriegner, A., Vierlinger, K. & Weinhäusel, A. A survey of tools for the analysis of quantitative PCR (qPCR) data. Biomol Detect Quant 1, 23–33 (2014).
Jordan, L. & Kurtz., R. BioRad Tech Note 6047: Optical Design of CFX96 RealTime PCR Detection System Eliminates the Requirement of a Passive Reference Dye. Date of access: 02/11/2016. http://www.biorad.com/webroot/web/pdf/lsr/literature/Bulletin_6047A.pdf (2010).
Sanford, L. N. & Wittwer, C. T. Monitoring temperature with fluorescence during realtime PCR and melting analysis. Anal Biochem 434, 26–33 (2013).
Guescini, M., Sisti, D., Rocchi, M. B., Stocchi, L. & Stocchi, V. A new realtime PCR method to overcome significant quantitative inaccuracy due to slight amplification inhibition. BMC Bioinformatics 9, 326 (2008).
Acknowledgements
Funding is provided by grant Sp721/4–2 of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) to A.N.S and InnoProfileTransfer grant 03IPT611X (Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Germany) to SR and MB. We would like to thank Dr. Markus Geißen for supplying access to qPCR hardware.
Author information
Affiliations
Contributions
A.N.S., S.R. and J.T. conducted and designed qPCR experiments and wrote the manuscript. M.B. programmed the web application. T.V. conducted qPCR experiments.
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
About this article
Cite this article
Spiess, AN., Rödiger, S., Burdukiewicz, M. et al. Systemspecific periodicity in quantitative realtime polymerase chain reaction data questions thresholdbased quantitation. Sci Rep 6, 38951 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep38951
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Further reading

Analysis of the microbiota involved in the early changes associated with indigo reduction in the natural fermentation of indigo
World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology (2019)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.