Table 4.

Analysis with 2 previous approaches that work without standard curves. Data for table 2 was analyzed as 3 subgroups of 5 samples each. For each curve, fluorescence of point 10 was subtracted as background from all points. With the DART-PCR approach, each curve was first analyzed separately for EA. R₀ values (that correspond to F₀) were calculated with the average EA for each subgroup. With the LinRegPCR approach, software version 7.2 was used to analyze each curve separately.

		DART-PCR approach					LinRegPCR approach
Target	Dilution step 1 : 4	mean EA subgroup	Factor arithmetic mean	SEM	Precision relative error (%)	Accuracy relative error (%)	EA range	Factor arithmetic mean	SEM	Precision relative error (%)	Accuracy relative error (%)
SLC6A14 rat	1	1.97	4.7	0.2	5	18	1.79 – 2.04	71.7	57	79	>1000
	2	1.94	6.4	1.6	25	61	1.71 – 2.09	0.94	0.23	24	77
	3	1.86	3.6	0.5	14	10	1.83 – 2.79	>1000	>1000	100	>1000
	4		5.0	1.1	21	26		8.6	8.5	99	114
SLC22A13 human	1	1.70	3.2	0.1	3	21	1.64 – 2.01	6.4	2.9	45	59
	2	1.70	3.3	0.1	2	17	1.68 – 2.24	254	227	89	>1000
	3	1.71	3.0	0.1	1	25	1.52 – 1.93	412	412	100	>1000
	4		3.1	0.1	4	23		36	36	100	797
EMT pig	1		3.0	0.2	6	25	1.67 – 2.02	8.8	7.7	87	121
	2	1.78	3.7	0.2	6	7	1.66 – 1.84	7.2	3.5	49	80
	3	1.87	6.8	2.9	43	69	1.60 – 1.75	11.7	4.9	42	193
	4	1.70	4.2	1.2	29	4		3.4	0.9	25	16
ETT chicken	1	1.87	4.9	1.2	25	22	1.77 – 1.91	3.0	0.6	19	24
	2	1.86	3.0	0.8	26	25	1.76 – 1.88	2.5	0.4	18	37
	3	1.92	4.0	0.3	7	1	1.85 – 1.92	2.4	0.8	32	39
	4		4.0	0.3	7	0		6.4	0.7	12	59
GAPDH human	1	1.86	2.9	0.1	3	28	1.84 – 1.90	4.6	0.4	10	15
	2	1.84	3.4	0.3	8	15	1.78 – 1.87	3.0	0.8	26	25
	3	1.81	4.0	0.2	4	1	1.77 – 1.86	6.3	0.5	7	58
	4		3.8	0.3	7	6		2.8	1.0	35	29
				Median:	7	19.5			Median:	38.5	58.5