title: Selection of reference genes for quantitative gene expression normalization in flax (Linum usitatissimum L.).
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) is currently the most accurate method for detecting differential gene expression. Such an approach depends on the identification of uniformly expressed 'housekeeping genes' (HKGs). Extensive transcriptomic data mining and experimental validation in different model plants have shown that the reliability of these endogenous controls can be influenced by the plant species, growth conditions and organs/tissues examined. It is therefore important to identify the best reference genes to use in each biological system before using qRT-PCR to investigate differential gene expression. In this paper we evaluate different candidate HKGs for developmental transcriptomic studies in the economically-important flax fiber- and oil-crop (Linum usitatissimum L).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Specific primers were designed in order to quantify the expression levels of 20 different potential housekeeping genes in flax roots, internal- and external-stem tissues, leaves and flowers at different developmental stages. After calculations of PCR efficiencies, 13 HKGs were retained and their expression stabilities evaluated by the computer algorithms geNorm and NormFinder. According to geNorm, 2 Transcriptional Elongation Factors (TEFs) and 1 Ubiquitin gene are necessary for normalizing gene expression when all studied samples are considered. However, only 2 TEFs are required for normalizing expression in stem tissues. In contrast, NormFinder identified glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GADPH) as the most stably expressed gene when all samples were grouped together, as well as when samples were classed into different sub-groups.qRT-PCR was then used to investigate the relative expression levels of two splice variants of the flax LuMYB1 gene (homologue of AtMYB59). LuMYB1-1 and LuMYB1-2 were highly expressed in the internal stem tissues as compared to outer stem tissues and other samples. This result was confirmed with both geNorm-designated- and NormFinder-designated-reference genes.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The use of 2 different statistical algorithms results in the identification of different combinations of flax HKGs for expression data normalization. Despite such differences, the use of geNorm-designated- and NormFinder-designated-reference genes enabled us to accurately compare the expression levels of a flax MYB gene in different organs and tissues. Our identification and validation of suitable flax HKGs will facilitate future developmental transcriptomic studies in this economically-important plant.
authors.affiliation: UMR INRA-USTL 1281 Stress Abiotiques et Différenciation des Végétaux Cultivés, Université Lille 1, Villeneuve d'Ascq, France.
authors.forename: Rudy
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Huis
authors.forename: Simon
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Hawkins
authors.forename: Godfrey
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Neutelings
mesh_terms: D019597:Flax / Q000235:genetics*; D020869:Gene Expression Profiling; D018506:Gene Expression Regulation, Plant; D017343:Genes, Plant / Q000235:genetics*; D010940:Plant Proteins / Q000235:genetics / Q000378:metabolism; D020033:Protein Isoforms / Q000235:genetics / Q000378:metabolism; D012015:Reference Standards; D020133:Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction / Q000592:standards*; D017386:Sequence Homology, Amino Acid
chemical_list: D010940:Plant Proteins; D020033:Protein Isoforms
references.citation: Biochim Biophys Acta. 1981 Jan 29;652(1):1-15
references.pmid: 7213728
references.citation: Mol Biol Rep. 2008 Dec;35(4):567-73
references.pmid: 17674141
references.citation: Comp Biochem Physiol B Biochem Mol Biol. 2001 Oct;130(3):281-9
references.pmid: 11567890
references.citation: Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2005 Jan;7(1):23-32
references.pmid: 15666211
references.citation: BMC Mol Biol. 2008 Jun 23;9:59
references.pmid: 18573215
references.citation: Plant Cell Rep. 2009 Mar;28(3):359-71
references.pmid: 19011860
references.citation: Plant J. 1995 Jul;8(1):1-8
references.pmid: 7655501
references.citation: Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2006 Jun 30;345(2):646-51
references.pmid: 16690022
references.citation: J Exp Bot. 2006;57(6):1263-73
references.pmid: 16531467
references.citation: Cancer Res. 2004 Aug 1;64(15):5245-50
references.pmid: 15289330
references.citation: Genome Biol. 2002 Jun 18;3(7):RESEARCH0034
references.pmid: 12184808
references.citation: Trends Biotechnol. 2002 Jun;20(6):229-30
references.pmid: 12007483
references.citation: Methods Mol Biol. 2000;132:365-86
references.pmid: 10547847
references.citation: BMC Plant Biol. 2004 Aug 18;4:14
references.pmid: 15317655
references.citation: BMC Plant Biol. 2006 Nov 14;6:27
references.pmid: 17105665
references.citation: Planta. 2005 Oct;222(2):234-45
references.pmid: 15968509
references.citation: Mol Genet Genomics. 2007 Aug;278(2):149-65
references.pmid: 17503083
references.citation: J Biotechnol. 2004 Jan 8;107(1):41-54
references.pmid: 14687970
references.citation: J Biotechnol. 2007 Mar 10;128(4):919-34
references.pmid: 17280732
references.citation: Chemosphere. 2008 Oct;73(5):657-62
references.pmid: 18774158
references.citation: J Exp Bot. 2004 Jul;55(402):1445-54
references.pmid: 15208338
references.citation: J Agric Food Chem. 2001 Dec;49(12):5778-84
references.pmid: 11743763
references.citation: Plant Cell. 1995 Oct;7(10):1645-1654
references.pmid: 12242357
references.citation: J Exp Bot. 2009;60(2):487-93
references.pmid: 19264760
references.citation: BMC Plant Biol. 2008 Nov 07;8:112
references.pmid: 18992143
references.citation: Plant Mol Biol. 2007 Mar;63(5):679-88
references.pmid: 17143578
references.citation: J Exp Bot. 2005 Nov;56(421):2907-14
references.pmid: 16188960
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2008 Sep;148(1):119-31
references.pmid: 18641086
references.citation: BMC Plant Biol. 2008 Dec 22;8:131
references.pmid: 19102748
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Jul 1;31(13):3406-15
references.pmid: 12824337
references.citation: Biotechnol Lett. 2003 Nov;25(21):1869-72
references.pmid: 14677714
references.citation: Lipids. 2008 Aug;43(8):749-55
references.pmid: 18597133
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2005 Sep;139(1):79-87
references.pmid: 16113219
references.citation: J Plant Physiol. 2009 Sep 15;166(14):1576-80
references.pmid: 19410334
references.citation: Curr Genet. 1993 Nov;24(5):428-32
references.pmid: 8299159
references.citation: BMC Plant Biol. 2007 Mar 02;7:11
references.pmid: 17335571
references.citation: Trends Biotechnol. 2005 Jan;23(1):22-7
references.pmid: 15629854
references.citation: Physiol Plant. 2001 Oct;113(2):275-284
references.pmid: 12060306
references.citation: Anal Biochem. 2008 Aug 15;379(2):176-81
references.pmid: 18503743
references.citation: Cell Res. 2009 Nov;19(11):1291-304
references.pmid: 19581938
references.citation: BMC Mol Biol. 2009 Feb 20;10:11
references.pmid: 19232096
references.citation: BMC Mol Biol. 2009 Jan 06;10:1
references.pmid: 19126214
references.citation: J Exp Bot. 2006;57(9):1919-32
references.pmid: 16606634
references.citation: Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1998 Apr 17;245(2):295-300
references.pmid: 9571144
references.citation: Genome. 1994 Feb;37(1):137-47
references.pmid: 8181734
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993 Sep 15;90(18):8519-23
references.pmid: 8378325
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 1996 Mar;110(3):721-729
references.pmid: 12226214
references.citation: Physiol Plant. 2001 Jun;112(2):223-232
references.pmid: 11454228
references.citation: Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2007 Dec;10(6):564-72
references.pmid: 17950657
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 1981 Mar 25;9(6):1301-9
references.pmid: 6262724
references.citation: Plant Cell. 2009 Jan;21(1):248-66
references.pmid: 19122102
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2005 Sep;139(1):5-17
references.pmid: 16166256
references.citation: FEBS J. 2009 Jun;276(11):3148-62
references.pmid: 19490115
references.citation: J Exp Bot. 2008;59(14):3925-39
references.pmid: 18805909