Measuring E. coli and bacteriophage DNA in cell sonicates to evaluate the CAL1 reaction as a synthetic biology standard for qPCR

Q1 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Biomolecular Detection and Quantification Pub Date : 2017-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.bdq.2016.12.001
Alexander Templar, Desmond M. Schofield, Darren N. Nesbeth
{"title":"Measuring E. coli and bacteriophage DNA in cell sonicates to evaluate the CAL1 reaction as a synthetic biology standard for qPCR","authors":"Alexander Templar,&nbsp;Desmond M. Schofield,&nbsp;Darren N. Nesbeth","doi":"10.1016/j.bdq.2016.12.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We measured the impact of the presence of total <em>Escherichia coli</em> (<em>E. coli</em>) cellular material on the performance of the Linear Regression of Efficiency (LRE) method of absolute quantitative PCR (LRE qPCR), which features the putatively universal CAL1 calibration reaction, which we propose as a synthetic biology standard. We firstly used a qPCR reaction in which a sequence present in the lone genomic BirA locus is amplified. Amplification efficiency for this reaction, a key metric for many quantitative qPCR methods, was inhibited by cellular material from bioreactor cultivation to a greater extent than material from shake flask cultivation. We then compared LRE qPCR to the Standard Curve method of absolute qPCR (SC qPCR). LRE qPCR method matched the performance of the SC qPCR when used to measure 417–4.17<!--> <!-->×<!--> <!-->10<sup>7</sup> copies of the BirA target sequence present in a shake flask-derived cell sonicates sample, and for 97–9.7<!--> <!-->×<!--> <!-->10<sup>5</sup> copies in the equivalent bioreactor-derived sample. A plasmid-encoded T7 bacteriophage sequence was next used to compare the methods. In the presence of cell sonicates from samples of up to OD<sub>600</sub> <!-->=<!--> <!-->160, LRE qPCR outperformed SC qPCR in the range of 1.54<!--> <!-->×<!--> <!-->10<sup>8</sup>–1.54<!--> <!-->×<!--> <!-->10<sup>10</sup> copies of the T7 target sequence and matched SC qPCR over 1.54<!--> <!-->×<!--> <!-->10<sup>4</sup>–1.54<!--> <!-->×<!--> <!-->10<sup>7</sup> copies. These data suggest the CAL1 standard, combined with the LRE qPCR method, represents an attractive choice as a synthetic biology qPCR standard that performs well even when unpurified industrial samples are used as the source of template material.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":38073,"journal":{"name":"Biomolecular Detection and Quantification","volume":"11 ","pages":"Pages 21-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bdq.2016.12.001","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomolecular Detection and Quantification","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214753516300365","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

We measured the impact of the presence of total Escherichia coli (E. coli) cellular material on the performance of the Linear Regression of Efficiency (LRE) method of absolute quantitative PCR (LRE qPCR), which features the putatively universal CAL1 calibration reaction, which we propose as a synthetic biology standard. We firstly used a qPCR reaction in which a sequence present in the lone genomic BirA locus is amplified. Amplification efficiency for this reaction, a key metric for many quantitative qPCR methods, was inhibited by cellular material from bioreactor cultivation to a greater extent than material from shake flask cultivation. We then compared LRE qPCR to the Standard Curve method of absolute qPCR (SC qPCR). LRE qPCR method matched the performance of the SC qPCR when used to measure 417–4.17 × 107 copies of the BirA target sequence present in a shake flask-derived cell sonicates sample, and for 97–9.7 × 105 copies in the equivalent bioreactor-derived sample. A plasmid-encoded T7 bacteriophage sequence was next used to compare the methods. In the presence of cell sonicates from samples of up to OD600 = 160, LRE qPCR outperformed SC qPCR in the range of 1.54 × 108–1.54 × 1010 copies of the T7 target sequence and matched SC qPCR over 1.54 × 104–1.54 × 107 copies. These data suggest the CAL1 standard, combined with the LRE qPCR method, represents an attractive choice as a synthetic biology qPCR standard that performs well even when unpurified industrial samples are used as the source of template material.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测定大肠杆菌和噬菌体DNA在细胞声索中评价CAL1反应作为qPCR的合成生物学标准
我们测量了总大肠杆菌(E. coli)细胞物质的存在对绝对定量PCR (LRE qPCR)效率线性回归(LRE)方法性能的影响,该方法具有假定的通用CAL1校准反应,我们提出作为合成生物学标准。我们首先使用qPCR反应,其中一个序列存在于单个基因组BirA位点被扩增。该反应的扩增效率是许多定量qPCR方法的关键指标,生物反应器培养的细胞材料比摇瓶培养的细胞材料更大程度地抑制了该反应的扩增效率。然后将LRE qPCR与绝对qPCR的标准曲线法(SC qPCR)进行比较。LRE qPCR方法在震荡瓶衍生的细胞超声样品中检测417-4.17 × 107拷贝的BirA靶序列,在等效生物反应器衍生的样品中检测97-9.7 × 105拷贝的BirA靶序列时,其性能与SC qPCR相匹配。采用质粒编码的T7噬菌体序列对两种方法进行比较。在OD600 = 160的样本中,LRE qPCR在T7靶序列的1.54 × 108-1.54 × 1010拷贝范围内优于SC qPCR,而与SC qPCR匹配的T7靶序列超过1.54 × 104-1.54 × 107拷贝。这些数据表明,CAL1标准,结合LRE qPCR方法,代表了一个有吸引力的选择,作为合成生物学qPCR标准,即使未纯化的工业样品被用作模板材料的来源,也表现良好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Biomolecular Detection and Quantification
Biomolecular Detection and Quantification Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biochemistry
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Publisher's Note Establishing essential quality criteria for the validation of circular RNAs as biomarkers qPCR data analysis: Better results through iconoclasm Considerations and quality controls when analyzing cell-free tumor DNA Next-generation sequencing of HIV-1 single genome amplicons
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1