Comparison of the transcriptomes of hmgb1 vs Col-0
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
ORGANISM(S): Arabidopsis thaliana
SUBMITTER: Joke Allemeersch
PROVIDER: E-GEOD-10638 | biostudies-arrayexpress |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-arrayexpress
Publications
The expression level of the chromatin-associated HMGB1 protein influences growth, stress tolerance, and transcriptome in Arabidopsis.
Lildballe Dorte Launholt DL Pedersen Dorthe S DS Kalamajka Rainer R Emmersen Jeppe J Houben Andreas A Grasser Klaus D KD
Journal of molecular biology 20080916 1
High mobility group (HMG) proteins of the HMGB family are small and relatively abundant chromatin-associated proteins. As architectural factors, the HMGB proteins are involved in the regulation of transcription and other DNA-dependent processes. We have examined Arabidopsis mutant plants lacking the HMGB1 protein, which is a typical representative of the plant HMGB family. In addition, our analyses included transgenic plants overexpressing HMGB1 and mutant plants that were transformed with the H ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Testing the consequences of the absence of the transcript elongation factor TFIIS on the transcriptome in Arabidopsis. Keywords: Comparison of mutant and wildtype Four replicate RNA extractions were performed of each genotype using independent pools of plants. Samples were hybridized in two dye-swaps. tfIIs1#1 (Cy5) vs. Col-0#1 (Cy3) Col-0#2 (Cy5) vs. tfIIs1#2 (Cy3) dye-swap tfIIs1#3 (Cy5) vs. Col-0#3 (Cy3) Col-0#5 (Cy5) vs. tfIIs1#4 (Cy3) dye-swap Samples were hybridized in two dye-swaps. The data were normalized over all 4 hybridizations to obtain one, single log-ratio(Sample/Reference). The raw data files of all four of the hybridizations are attached to the Sample.
2010-04-03 | E-GEOD-10663 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Sample groupings for this project are as follows: Cauline leaf vs Cultured Cell : - Cauline leaf, p1; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) - Cauline leaf, p2; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) - Cauline leaf, p3; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) Cotyledon light vs Cotyledon dark : - Cotyledon, CP1; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) - Cotyledon, CP2; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) Cotyledon light vs Cultured cell : - Cotyledon, cn1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Cotyledon, cn2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Cotyledon dark vs Cultured cell : - Cotyledon dark, n1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Cotyledon dark, n2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Cotyledon dark, n3; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Germinating seed vs Cultured cell : - Germinating seed, gn1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Germinating seed, gn2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Germinating seed, gn3; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Hypocotyl light vs Hypocotyl dark : - Hypocotyl, hldn1; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) - Hypocotyl, hldn2; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) Hypocotyl light vs Cultured cell : - Hypocotyl light, hln1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Hypocotyl light, hln2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Petal vs Cultured cell : - Petal, pn1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Petal, pn2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Petal, pn3; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) 1DBP vs Cultured cell : - Pistil 1DBP, pin1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Pistil 1DBP, pin2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Pistil 1DBP, pin3; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Pistil 1DPP vs Cultured cell : - Pistil 1DPP, psn1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Pistil 1DPP, psn2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Pistil 1DPP, psn3; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Pistil 1DPP, psn4; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Root dark vs Cultured cell : - Root dark, rdn1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Root dark, rdn2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Root light vs Cultured cell : - Root light, rln1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Root light, rlp1; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) Root light vs Root dark : - Root light vs dark, rldp1; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) - Root light vs dark, rldp2; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) Rosette leaf vs Cultured cell : - Rosette leaf, rfp1; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) - Rosette leaf, rfp2; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) - Rosette leaf, rfp3; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) Sepal vs Cultured cell : - Sepal, sn1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Sepal, sn2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Silique 3DPP vs Cultured cell : - Silique 3DPP, s3n1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Silique 3DPP, s3n2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Silique 3DPP, s3n3; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Silique 8DPP vs Cultured cell : - Silique 8DPP, s8n1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Silique 8DPP, s8n2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Silique 8DPP, s8n3; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Stamen vs Cultured cell : - Stamen, smn1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Stamen, smn2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Stamen, smn3; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Hypocotyl dark vs Cultured cell : - Hypocotyl dark, hn1; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) - Hypocotyl dark, hn2; Exp:Green; Ref: Red (Cy3:Cy5) Stem vs Cultured cell : - Stem, stp1; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) - Stem, stp2; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) - Stem, stp3; Exp:Red; Ref: Green (Cy5:Cy3) Keywords: other
2004-10-24 | GSE1599 | GEO
Project description:Total and polyribosomal RNA was extracted from rosette leaves of 5-6-week-old wild-type and transgenic Arabidopsis plants (ecotype Col-0). After linear amplification using a modified Eberwine procedure, Cy3- or Cy5-labeled cDNA targets were produced from sense-strand RNA through reverse transcription Keywords: repeat sample
2005-06-06 | GSE2132 | GEO
Project description:Comparison of the transcriptomes of hmgb1 vs Col-0
| PRJNA107709 | ENA
Project description:P. aeruginosa PAO wildtype Cy3 PA3898 mutant Cy5
| PRJNA491282 | ENA
Project description:In Western countries, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in both men and women and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths (approximately 500,000 deaths annually). For CRC, the tumor stage is the main prognostic factor for survival or relapse after surgery. Current staging is based on the AJCC classification which takes into account tumor size/depth, lymph node involvement and distant metastases. Surgical intervention can cure a significant portion of the patients, especially those that are presented in stages I, II or III (around 75% of patients). Patients in stage II undergo surgery only, whereas stage III patients receive adjuvant chemotherapy. However, a major fraction of these patients either have no need for adjuvant treatment (40% stage III) or would benefit when they were given adjuvant therapy in stage II. Therefore, in the current practice, the majority of patients receive not the optimal treatment. An accurate and reliable method that identifies patients with low and high risk for recurrence could improve the selection for adjuvant therapies in these groups, reducing over- or under-treatment. Molecular profiling of mRNA expression by microarray is an approach to identify relevant genes and gene signatures and has been used already for different types of cancer, like breast and HCC. Most studies, however, resulted in their own classification with a specific separation into groups. Most of these microarray studies show remarkably little overlap and it is difficult to find a clear correlation between the molecular classes and prognosis. The results of the studies seem to be center-dependent because of the different microarray techniques used, the small heterogeneous cohorts that are studied and the different clinical parameters used for the evaluation. Recently, we used a mechanism-driven approach to find a correlation between gene expression in HCC and prognosis in which we tried to overcome most shortcomings (van Malenstein et al. CCR 2010). In this study, we want to apply the approach which we used for HCC now in CRC with the aim to improve the prognosis prediction for patients in AJCC stage II and III. We determined the gene expression by microarray in the colon cancer cell line Caco2 and identified the genes that are differentially expressed under hypoxia (72 hours, 2% O2). Using a bioinformatic approach, we used 5 sets of expression data with corresponding clinical information (training: 3 sets, 234 patients and validation: 2 sets, 322 patients). This resulted in a unique 21 gene set with good performance in retrospective analysis. A second improvement we wanted to achieve is the development of a method that can be applied on FFPE material, which would expand the use of the technique to samples outside the university or research setting. We used the nCounter technique that uses hybridization of labeled probes and quantification without an amplification step. We tested our 21 genes on a cohort of 384 well-characterized patients that were collected between 2004 and 2006 at the University Hospitals of Leuven. We compared cells under hypoxia 2% O2 versus 20% O2 conditions. This was done for two cell lines (Caco2 human colorectal adenocarcinoma cell line and HPAC pancreas adenocarcinoma cell line). Each sample has a biological replicate. Samples are hybridized in dye-swap, resulting in 4 hybridizations per cell line.
2014-05-22 | E-GEOD-31079 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Microarray was performed on PBMC with an inflammatory dedicated slide of 340 genes, and target samples labelled with Cy3 for day 0 (reference) and with Cy5 for the other days. Changes in expression levels were evaluated by the ratio Dx/D0. According to outcome and time evolution, a two-dimensional clustering was performed. Keywords: dead vs alive septic shock patients at D1 post-inclusion
2006-08-01 | GSE5262 | GEO
Project description:The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of autotetraploidy on gene expression in Arabidopsis thaliana by comparing diploid versus tetraploid transcriptomes. In particular, this included the comparison of the transcriptome of different tetraploid A. thaliana ecotypes (Col-0 vs. Ler-0). The study was extended to address further aspects. One was the comparison of the transcriptomes in subsequent generations. This intended to obtain information on the genome wide stability of autotetraploid gene expression. Another line of work compared the transcriptomes of different diploid vs. tetraploid tissues. This aimed to investigate whether particular gene groups are specifically affected during the development of A. thaliana autotetraploids. Samples 1-8: Arabidopsis thaliana Col-0 tetraploid transcriptome. Transcriptional profiling and comparison of diploid vs. tetraploid Col-0 seedlings. The experiment was carried out with pedigree of independently generated and assessed tetraploid Col-0 lines. Samples 9-12: Arabidopsis thaliana Ler-0 tetraploid transcriptome. Transcriptional profiling and comparison of diploid vs. tetraploid Ler-0 seedlings. The experiment was carried out with pedigree of independently generated and assessed tetraploid Ler-0 lines. Samples 13-24: Arabidopsis thaliana Col-0 tetraploid transcriptome. Transcriptional profiling and comparison of diploid vs. tetraploid Col-0 leaves (6th - 8th). The experiment was carried out with pedigree of independently generated and assessed tetraploid Col-0 lines. Samples 25-32: Arabidopsis thaliana Ler-0 tetraploid transcriptome. Transcriptional profiling and comparison of diploid vs. tetraploid Ler-0 leaves (6th - 8th). The experiment was carried out with pedigree of independently generated and assessed tetraploid Ler-0 lines. Samples 33-36: Arabidopsis thaliana Ler-0 tetraploid transcriptome. Transcriptional profiling and comparison of tetraploid vs. tetraploid Ler-0 seedlings from the second (F2) and third (F3) generation after induction, respectively. The experiment was carried out with pedigree of independently generated and assessed tetraploid Ler-0 lines. Samples 37-40: Arabidopsis thaliana Col-0 tetraploid transcriptome. Transcriptional profiling and comparison of tetraploid vs. tetraploid Col-0 seedlings from the second (F2) and third (F3) generation after induction, respectively. The experiment was carried out with pedigree of independently generated and assessed tetraploid Col-0 lines. Samples 41-44: Arabidopsis thaliana Col-0/Ler-0 diploid transcriptome. Transcriptional profiling and comparison of diploid Col-0 vs. diploid Ler-0 seedlings. The experiment was carried out with pedigree of esrablished lines. Samples 45-48: Arabidopsis thaliana Col-0/Ler-0 tetraploid transcriptome. Transcriptional profiling and comparison of tetraploid Col-0 vs tetraploid Ler-0 seedlings. The experiment was carried out with pedigree of independently generated and assessed tetraploid Col-0 and Ler-0 lines.
2010-05-01 | GSE18482 | GEO
Project description:Comparing gene expression in a Bellringer overexpressor vs wild-type Col-0. 3 biological sample replicates were used for microarray analyses.<br> <br> In order to control against dye bias and dye specific artifacts the replicate arrays had a "dye swop" design:<br> <br> Array 1: cy5 Col-0 a; cy5 BLR-OX_Van a<br> Array 2: cy5 BLR-OX_Van b; cy5 Col-0 b<br> Array 3: cy5 Col-0 c; cy5 BLR-OX_Van c
2008-10-01 | E-MEXP-852 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Comparison of gene expression profiles in cotton fiber development (from 10 to 23 DPA) of two lines. Line 1 was excellent fiber strength, denoted with H; Line 2 was poor fiber strength, denoted withL. Analysis used H20 RNA as control samples for comparison to the experimental samples taken at 5, 10, 15 and 23 DPA. Indirect comparisons were made across multiple arrays with raw data pulled from different channels for data analysis and comparison to the control data.Cy3 and Cy5 dyes were used as follows:Set 1:H10-Cy5 vs H20-Cy3, Set 1(dye swap):H10-Cy3 vs H20-Cy5; Set 2:H15-Cy5 vs H20-Cy3,Set 2 (dya swap):H15-Cy3 vs H20-Cy5; Set 3:H23-Cy5 vs H20-Cy3, Set 3 (dya swap):H23-Cy3 vs H20-Cy5; Set 4:L10-Cy5 vs H20-Cy3, Set 4 (dya swap):L10-Cy3 vs H20-Cy5; Set 5:L15-Cy5 vs H20-Cy3, Set 5 (dya swap):L15-Cy3 vs H20-Cy5; Set 6:L20-Cy5 vs H20-Cy3, Set 6 (dya swap):L20-Cy3 vs H20-Cy5; Set 7:L23-Cy5 vs H20-Cy3, Set 7 (dya swap):L23-Cy3 vs H20-Cy5; Set 8:H20-Cy5 vs H20-Cy3.
2015-07-22 | E-GEOD-30944 | biostudies-arrayexpress