Can you correct my abstract in English, please.. - (Aug/22/2006 )

I'm from Poland and my English is not good. I prefer read rather than write... I must write an abstract about my work and I have problem... Please! Help me! My abstract:

" In this work real-time RT-PCR techniques, including stages, quantification strategies and normalization was reviewed. Additionally, qRT-PCR was used to identify the most suitable housekeeping gene in studies of endometrium tumour. Two genes was investigated in this assay: GAPDH and β-actin. Both genes are found as good control although not without drawbacks."

or

"In the report current literature dealing with real-time RT-PCR with its stages, quantitive assesement and normalization was presented. Additionally, qRT-PCR was used to identify the most suitable genes for endogenous control. Two genes was investigated in this assay: GAPDH and β-actin. It was found that both genes are usefull as a endogenous control but data indicating the limitation of their application were presented."

---

I'll have a go if you like . . . keep in mind, though, I'm not perfect either I can't really speak as to content, but the grammar I can do. Either abstract might work, but both have some problems . . .

"In this report real-time PCR techniques (including stages), quantification strategies, and normalization were reviewed. Additionally, qRT-PCR was used to identify the most suitable housekeeping gene in studies of endometrium tumours (or tumour cells). Two genes were investigated in this assay: GAPDH and β-actin (these are names of proteins not genes). Both genes were found to act as good controls, although not without drawbacks."

or

"In this report current literature dealing with real-time PCR (and its stages), quantitative assesement and normalization was reviewed. Additionally, qRT-PCR was used to identify the most suitable genes for endogenous control (control when using what?). Two genes were investigated in this assay: GAPDH and β-actin (still not technically the names of genes). It was found that both genes are useful as an endogenous control, but data indicated limitations in their application."


Does that help at all? For my part, I think I like the second one better. Anyone else should feel free to weigh in an correct me as well

ETA: a correction about the gene names

---

Just for my own advancement of knowledge, what ARE the names of the genes encoding the GAPDH and beta-actin proteins?

---

I don't know what Meres means but there are some guidelines here I think I'll follow: http://www.nature.com/ncb/journal/v5/n1/fu...73CDA8AD96B5DC1

---

I'm not actually sure myself what those particular genes are called, but gene names are things like lacZ or v-sis or lasR or similar . . . naming the gene product (that is, the protein, like β-galactosidase) is not correct if you specify "gene" in your sentence. I can certainly remember people getting on my back about that . . . I thought it was a standard sort of editor's pickup? Hmm . . .

---

I was actually being sarcastic.

The genes encoding GAPDH and beta-actin are called the GAPDH gene and the beta-actin gene with reference to the Homo sapiens genome.

Most human genes are named for the protein products. When naming baterial genes different conventions are used.

---

Ah, I'd wondered if that was the case actually. I hadn't looked into it, but I had a vague recollection that the conventions were a bit different, just not to what extent. That's my bad. As I said, I couldn't exactly comment as to content--the subject isn't really my bailiwick.

However, I can't say I appreciate the sarcasm. A simple correction would have been more helpful to me and to frecklis, thanks kindly. These things don't translate into type.

---