Protocol Online logo
Top : Forum Archives: : Molecular Biology

Northern vs qRT-PCR for expression quantitation - (Sep/14/2005 )

Both Northern and qRT-PCR are often used for quantitative detection of gene expression. I know northern is a golden method. However, the method of qRT-PCR is developing. Do you think Northern still has some advantage than qRT-PCR in term of precision? Thanks.

-liu3zhen-

I tend to believe in Norther more than in qRT-PCR because Northern gives you visual evidence - Seeing is believing.

-pcrman-

I agree with pcrman.
Under circumstances favorable (that is: at least 5 microgram total RNA available, no partial degradation of sample), you should choose northern, since signals are directly related to the amount of starting material.


QUOTE (pcrman @ Sep 14 2005, 10:47 PM)
I tend to believe in Norther more than in qRT-PCR because Northern gives you visual evidence - Seeing is believing.

-sergechampetier-

Northerns can tell you transcript size, RT-PCR can not

-genejock-

QUOTE (genejock @ Sep 15 2005, 01:26 PM)
Northerns can tell you transcript size, RT-PCR can not


I prefer qRT-PCR over Northerns.

More things can go wrong with Northerns that prevent easy quantification of transcript (high background, degradation, etc.) and there isn't really a fool-proof control.

And yes, you can tell the transcript size from RT-PCR. Run the cDNA product out on a gel. It's easy and you don't have to worry about Rnase. I do it every day in our lab.

-Matt

-MisticMatt-

quantitatively, I believe qRT-PCR is more accurate than northen blots
qualitatively, a northen is better a describing the transcripts

-tap14-

Northerns cannot be used reliably to quantitate transcripts. Did you know that you cannot discern a 50% change in quantity on a northern blot by simply visualizing a gel? So, trying to compare your target transcript with a loading control when you can be off by 50% on both means that quantitation is impossible. You could use software that quantitates the bands on your northern, however, once a pixel is saturated, that method becomes invalid. Northerns are very useful in determining the number of transcripts produced and their relative size, even if both are unknown. real-time PCR cannot do that... and to detect multiple transcripts by qRT-PCR you have to design primer sets that will recognize each transcript.

qRT-PCR is much better at quantitating transcripts. The key is to design your experiment appropriately and use a proper reference gene as your "loading control." qRT-PCR is much better than northerns for numerous other reasons, including:

1. you need MUCH LESS sample - I regularly run real-time RT-PCR on 25ng of sample or less, compared to 10ug per lane on a northern
2. No radioactivity - yay!
3. Much faster
4. Less experimental variables to consider - with northerns you worry about transfer, probe labeling, hybridization efficiency, etc...
5. You can compare results experiment to experiment (assuming you use a standard curve in each) - with northerns, you cannot compare one blot to another or one exposure to another.
6. And did I mention, no radioactivity? Yay!

-paladin-