Table 2.
Ranking of the candidate HKGs according to their stability value by geNorm, NormFinder and BestKeeper analysis.
| Gene name | geNorm | NormFinder | BestKeeper | delta-CT | Comprehensive | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | R | SV | R | SD | R | SD | R | GM | R | |
| Larva Tissues | ||||||||||
| gapdh | 1.037 | 1 | 0.796 | 1 | 1.045 | 2 | 1.34 | 1 | 1.19 | 1 |
| rpl32 | 1.389 | 5 | 1.03 | 4 | 0.914 | 1 | 1.47 | 4 | 2.99 | 3 |
| ubq | 1.037 | 1 | 0.898 | 2 | 1.18 | 4 | 1.39 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| sdf | 1.46 | 6 | 1.297 | 6 | 1.406 | 6 | 1.6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| tubulin | 1.344 | 4 | 1.211 | 5 | 1.224 | 5 | 1.54 | 5 | 4.73 | 5 |
| ef1a | 1.03 | 3 | 0.973 | 3 | 1.143 | 3 | 1.42 | 3 | 3 | 4 |
| Adult Tissues | ||||||||||
| gapdh | 0.964 | 1 | 0.543 | 1 | 1.16 | 2 | 1.48 | 2 | 1.41 | 2 |
| rpl32 | 0.964 | 1 | 0.549 | 2 | 1.048 | 1 | 1.46 | 1 | 1.19 | 1 |
| ubq | 1.402 | 4 | 1.372 | 4 | 1.886 | 5 | 1.84 | 4 | 4.23 | 4 |
| sdf | 1.217 | 3 | 1.3 | 3 | 1.49 | 4 | 1.8 | 3 | 3.22 | 3 |
| tubulin | 1.6 | 5 | 1.605 | 5 | 1.177 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 4.4 | 5 |
| ef1a | 1.796 | 6 | 1.866 | 6 | 2.29 | 6 | 2.19 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Combined larval and adult tissues | ||||||||||
| gapdh | 1.24 | 1 | 0.734 | 1 | 1.089 | 2 | 1.44 | 1 | 1.19 | 1 |
| rpl32 | 1.334 | 3 | 0.879 | 2 | 0.955 | 1 | 1.509 | 2 | 1.86 | 2 |
| ubq | 1.24 | 1 | 1.222 | 3 | 1.429 | 4 | 1.667 | 3 | 2.45 | 3 |
| sdf | 1.395 | 4 | 1.259 | 4 | 1.478 | 5 | 1.688 | 4 | 4.23 | 4 |
| tubulin | 1.554 | 5 | 1.351 | 5 | 1.364 | 3 | 1.76 | 5 | 4.4 | 5 |
| ef1a | 1.651 | 6 | 1.479 | 6 | 1.567 | 6 | 1.844 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
M, the gene expression stability measure; SD, standard deviation value; SV, stability value; GM, Geomean value and R, Ranking.