↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of RNA extraction kits and histological stains for laser capture microdissected prostate tissue

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of RNA extraction kits and histological stains for laser capture microdissected prostate tissue
Published in
BMC Research Notes, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-1813-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberley Kolijn, Geert J. L. H. van Leenders

Abstract

Laser capture microdissection offers unique possibilities for the isolation of specific cell populations or histological structures. However, isolation of RNA from microdissected tissue is challenging due to degradation and minimal yield of RNA during laser capture microdissection (LCM). Our aim was to optimize the isolation of high-quality RNA from laser capture microdissected fresh frozen prostate tissue on the level of staining and RNA extraction. Cresyl violet and haematoxylin were compared as histological stains for LCM. While RNA quality was similar for cresyl violet (median RIN 7.4) and haematoxylin (median RIN 7.6), tissue morphology was more detailed with cresyl violet as compared to haematoxylin. RNA quality from the following kits was compared: RNeasy(®) Micro (median RIN 7.2), miRNeasy Mini (median RIN 6.6), Picopure(®) (median RIN 6.0), mirVana™ miRNA (median RIN 6.5) and RNAqueous(®)-Micro (median RIN 6.3). RNA quality from microdissected samples with either the RNeasy Micro or miRNeasy Mini kit, was comparable to RNA isolated directly from whole tissue slices (median RIN 7.5, p = 0.09). Isolated RNA from benign and prostate cancer microdissected tissue demonstrated that RNA quality can vary between regions from the same clinical sample. Additionally, RNA quality (r = 0.89), but not quantity (r = 0.69) could be precisely measured with the Agilent Bioanalyzer. We demonstrate that staining with cresyl violet results in the isolation of high quality RNA from laser capture microdissected tissue with high discriminative morphology. The RNeasy Micro and miRNeasy Mini RNA extraction kits generated the highest quality RNA compared to Picopure, mirVana and RNAqueous with minimal loss of RNA quality during LCM.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Netherlands 1 3%
Unknown 32 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 21%
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Master 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 24%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 3 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 January 2016.
All research outputs
#18,434,182
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#3,017
of 4,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,412
of 393,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#110
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,266 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 393,726 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.