4.4 Article

qPCRTag Analysis - A High Throughput, Real Time PCR Assay for Sc2.0 Genotyping

期刊

出版社

JOURNAL OF VISUALIZED EXPERIMENTS
DOI: 10.3791/52941

关键词

Molecular Biology; Issue 99; Sc2.0; synthetic biology; Saccharomyces cerevisiae; genotyping; PCRTag; Cobra; Echo; LightCycler 1536; real time PCR

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [MCB-0718846]
  2. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency [N66001-12-C-4020]
  3. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  4. Direct For Biological Sciences
  5. Div Of Molecular and Cellular Bioscience [1443299] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Synthetic Yeast Genome Project (Sc2.0) aims to build 16 designer yeast chromosomes and combine them into a single yeast cell. To date one synthetic chromosome, synlll(1), and one synthetic chromosome arm, synlXR(2), have been constructed and their in vivo function validated in the absence of the corresponding wild type chromosomes. An important design feature of Sc2.0 chromosomes is the introduction of PCRTags, which are short, re-coded sequences within open reading frames (ORFs) that enable differentiation of synthetic chromosomes from their wild type counterparts. PCRTag primers anneal selectively to either synthetic or wild type chromosomes and the presence/absence of each type of DNA can be tested using a simple PCR assay. The standard readout of the PCRTag assay is to assess presence/absence of amplicons by agarose gel electrophoresis. However, with an average PCRTag amplicon density of one per 1.5 kb and a genome size of similar to 12 Mb, the completed Sc2.0 genome will encode roughly 8,000 PCRTags. To improve throughput, we have developed a real time PCR-based detection assay for PCRTag genotyping that we call qPCRTag analysis. The workflow specifies 500 nl reactions in a 1,536 multiwell plate, allowing us to test up to 768 PCRTags with both synthetic and wild type primer pairs in a single experiment.

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

4.4
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