4.8 Article

Sensitive detection of sample interference in environmental qPCR

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 46, 期 10, 页码 3251-3260

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2012.03.041

关键词

qPCR; Kinetic outlier detection; Microbial source tracking; Water quality; Bacteroides; Microbial ecology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sample interference in environmental applications of quantitative PCR (qPCR) can prevent accurate estimations of molecular markers in the environment. We developed a spike-and-recovery approach using a mutant strain of Escherichia coli that contains a chromosomal insertion of a mutant GFP gene. The method was tested in water samples by separately reducing extraction efficiency or adding humic acids and ethanol, compounds that often contaminate environmental DNA extracts, and analyzing qPCR amplification of the spiked E. coli control and human fecal Bacteroides markers (HF183 and HF134). This approach, coupled with previously developed kinetic outlier detection (KOD) methods, allowed sensitive detection of PCR inhibition at much lower inhibitor concentrations than alternative approaches using Cq values or amplification efficiencies. Although HF183 was more sensitive to the effects of qPCR inhibitors than the E. coli control assay, KOD methods correctly identified inhibition of both control and HF183 assays in samples containing as little as 0.1 ng humic acids per reaction or 5% ethanol. Because sigmoidal modeling methods allow distinction of qPCR inhibition from poor DNA recovery, we were able to simultaneously identify qPCR-inhibited reactions and estimate recovery of nucleic acids in environmental samples using a single control assay. Since qPCR is currently used to estimate important water quality parameters that have serious economic and human health outcomes, these results are timely. While we demonstrate the methods in the context of water quality regulation, they will be useful in all areas of environmental research that use qPCR. (c) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据