The fragmented cRNA is hybridized with the microarray in a 16 hour-long process which is also very susceptible to variability. Probes which differ in their structural features hybridize to their targets with different dynamics [6], which additionally depend on the reaction conditions (temperature, salt concentration, etc.) [7]. Washing and staining steps are used to remove non-specifically bound cRNA and to attach the phycoerythrin-streptavidin complex to the biotinylated C and U nucleotides in the cRNA (3��IVT arrays) or to the terminal nucleotides added by terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase (TdT). In the scanning process the fluorescence of phycoerythrin, excitated with a laser, is measured by the microarray scanner.

Every step of these experimental procedures is susceptible to factors that can significantly affect the expression estimates, leading to increased between-probe and between-sample variations of non-biological origin. In order to properly interpret the data a comprehensive understanding of these sources of variation is necessary, and despite the large number of potential sources the incorporation of artifacts-aware methods in the standard pre-processing is highly desirable.Probes appropriately assigned to transcript-specific sets should show a very similar signal with variance affected mainly by the measurement precision AV-951 of fluorescence level, similar across all samples and probesets in the experiment. In practice the variance of probes from a single probeset is substantially larger [8] and differs significantly between individual probesets, suggesting the influence of various probe specific effects.

The most frequently addressed source of high probe signal variability is inappropriate probeset definition based on inaccurate transcriptomic data [9�C11]. Despite this being one of the major problems, since as reported, depending on the platform, the inappropriate definitions can concern over 50% of all probes [9] it’s not the only reason for high inter-probe signal variance. In this work we focus on five distinct reasons for high variance of probe signals, other than the well-described problem of inaccurate probeset definitions, using an updated set of chip definition files (CDF’s) with probes re-annotated to the most recent version of the RefSeq transcript database [9]. The main goal of this study is to determine the source of high probe signal variance, assessing its influence on the expression estimates and determining the number of probesets affected by a specific factor.