Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AEM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AEM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Methods

Bias in Template-to-Product Ratios in Multitemplate PCR

Martin F. Polz, Colleen M. Cavanaugh
Martin F. Polz
The Biological Laboratories, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Colleen M. Cavanaugh
The Biological Laboratories, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.64.10.3724-3730.1998
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Fig. 1.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 1.

    Dot blot analyses showing the specificity of the oligonucleotide probes for their targets. (A) Genomic DNAs (left dots) and PCR-amplified 16S rDNAs (right dots) of B. subtilis, V. fischeri, and V. anguillarum were blotted together on three replicate membranes and hybridized with the specific probes Bsu, Van, and Vfi, respectively. (B) PCR-amplified 16S rDNAs of mutagenized plasmids Eco(GC), Eco(AT), and Eco(AT)m were blotted on two separate membranes and hybridized with the specific probes Eco and EcoM, respectively. The electronic image was taken from X-ray film exposed for 5 h.

  • Fig. 2.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 2.

    Effect of gene dosage as determined by amplification with different template ratios of Eco(AT) and Eco(AT)m and quantification of product ratios by quantitative dot blotting with probes Eco and EcoM. Regression analysis showed that the relationship between template and product ratios was linear. The vertical bars indicate standard deviations.

  • Fig. 3.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 3.

    Alignment of the sequences of universal amplification primers 27F and 1492R and their target regions on the 16S rRNA genes ofB. subtilis, V. fischeri, andV. anguillarum. The two primers each contain a single degeneracy (between C and T and between C and A, respectively). In theB. subtilis gene both priming sites contain a G at the degenerate site, which most likely results in a higher melting temperature for the primer-target duplex than the melting temperature for the two Vibrio genes, which contain an A and a T at the two positions.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Table 1.

    Designations and targets of amplification primers and hybridization probes

    Primer or probeSequenceaPositionsbTarget
    Primers
     27FAGAGTTTGATC(C/A)TGGCTCAG8–27(Eu)bacterial 16S rDNA
     27F(A)AGAGTTTGATC  A TGGCTCAG8–27(Eu)bacterial 16S rDNA containing T at position 19
     27F(C)AGAGTTTGATC  C TGGCTCAG8–27(Eu)bacterial 16S rDNA containing G at position 19
     1492RTACGG(C/T)TACCTTGTTACGACTT1492–1513(Eu)bacterial 16S rDNA
     1492R(T)TACGG  T TACCTTGTTACGACTT1492–1513(Eu)bacterial 16S rDNA containing T at position 1497
     1492R(C)TACGG  C TACCTTGTTACGACTT1492–1513(Eu)bacterial 16S rDNA containing C at position 1497
    Probes
     BsuCGCGGGTCCATCTGTAAGTG219–238B. subtilis 16S rDNA
     VanCCTAGGCATATCCTGACGCG219–238V. anguillarum 16S rDNA
     VfiCCTGGGCTAATCTTAGCGCG219–238V. fischeri 16S rDNA
     EcoCTTTACTCCCTTCCTCCCCG443–462E. coli mutagenized 16S rDNA with C [Eco(GC)] or A/T [Eco(AT)] in priming regions
     EcoMCTTTACTGGGAAGCTCCCCG443–462E. coli mutagenized 16S rDNA with A/T in priming region and nucleotides 450 to 455 exchanged [Eco(AT)m]
     EubcGCTGCCTCCCGTAGGAGT338–355(Eu)bacterial 16S rDNA
    • ↵a The nucleotides in boldface type are degenerate nucleotides in amplification primers and their permutations.

    • ↵b E. coli numbering.

    • ↵c Probe Eub is identical to S-D-Bact-0338-a-A-18 (1).

  • Table 2.

    Comparison of 16S rDNA gene template and PCR product ratios in simultaneous PCR amplifications of three bacterial genomes with degenerate primersa

    PrepnSpecies ratiosb
    B. subtilis/ V. fischeriB. subtilis/ V. anguillarumV. fischeri/ V. anguillarum
    Genomic mixture1.0 ± 0.061.0 ± 0.081.0 ± 0.07
    PCR mixture2.3 ± 0.183.2 ± 0.291.4 ± 0.13
    PCR 12.3 ± 0.123.7 ± 0.181.6 ± 0.09
    PCR 22.2 ± 0.133.2 ± 0.211.4 ± 0.09
    PCR 32.5 ± 0.173.2 ± 0.311.3 ± 0.12
    PCR 42.0 ± 0.153.5 ± 0.351.8 ± 0.15
    PCR 53.5 ± 0.253.5 ± 0.301.0 ± 0.08
    • ↵a The data were generated by dot blotting and hybridization with species-specific probes of equal amounts of template DNAs from the three species (genomic mixture), a mixture of 10 replicate PCR amplifications (25 cycles) performed with the genomic mixture (PCR mixture), and a subsample of 5 of the 10 replicate PCR amplifications (PCR 1 to 5).

    • ↵b Means ± standard deviations were calculated from data for nine replicate dots for each of the samples which was hybridized with the specific probes and quantified by phosphorimaging. Subsequently, the PCR product signals were normalized to the genomic mixture signal by using a constant factor for each species pair (see text).

  • Table 3.

    Effect of primer degeneracies on PCR product ratiosa

    PrepnEco(GC)/Eco(AT)m ratiob
    15 cycles25 cycles35 cycles
    Template mixture1.0 ± 0.041.0 ± 0.041.0 ± 0.04
    PCR 11.4 ± 0.161.5 ± 0.062.3 ± 0.10
    PCR 21.4 ± 0.141.8 ± 0.112.3 ± 0.07
    PCR 31.3 ± 0.111.7 ± 0.072.5 ± 0.20
    PCR 41.4 ± 0.261.9 ± 0.071.9 ± 0.14
    PCR 51.3 ± 0.161.8 ± 0.092.0 ± 0.17
    • ↵a The data were generated by dot blot hybridization by using the template-specific probes Eco and EcoM and mixtures containing equal amounts of templates Eco(GC) and Eco(AT)m. PCR products were amplified from the same template mixtures for 15, 25, and 35 cycles.

    • ↵b Means ± standard deviations were calculated from data for three replicate dots for each of the samples which was hybridized with the specific probes and quantified by phosphorimaging.

  • Table 4.

    Reproducibility of PCR amplification of a single template in a complex mixture of nucleic acids from a natural communitya

    PrepnV. anguillarum/(eu)bacterial 16S rDNA ratiob
    10% V. anguillarum1% V. anguillarum0.1%V. anguillarum
    PCR 10.156 ± 0.0080.017 ± 0.001NDc
    PCR 20.147 ± 0.0110.020 ± 0.000ND
    PCR 30.153 ± 0.0050.016 ± 0.001ND
    • ↵a The data were generated by dot blot hybridization by using the V. anguillarum-specific probe Van219 and the universal (eu)bacterial probe S-D-Bact-0338-a-A-18. PCR products were amplified from nucleic acids extracted from a natural community to which known amounts ofV. anguillarum DNA were added.

    • ↵b Means ± standard deviations were calculated from data for three replicate dots for each of the samples which was hybridized with the specific probes and quantified by phosphorimaging.

    • ↵c ND, not detected (below detection limit).

  • Table 5.

    Effect of lower number of cycles of the PCR on skewing of product ratiosa

    PrepnSpecies ratiosb
    B. subtilis/ V. fischeriB. subtilis/ V. anguillarumV. fischeri/ V. anguillarum
    Genomic mixture1.0 ± 0.051.0 ± 0.061.0 ± 0.05
    PCR mixture, 10 cycles1.7 ± 0.102.2 ± 0.101.3 ± 0.04
    PCR mixture, 5 cycles1.3 ± 0.151.5 ± 0.141.1 ± 0.05
    • ↵a The data were generated by dot blotting and hybridization with species-specific probes containing equal amounts of template DNA from the three species (genomic mixture) and a mixture of 10 replicate PCR amplifications (5 and 10 cycles).

    • ↵b Means ± standard deviations were calculated from data for eight replicate dots for each of the samples which was hybridized with the specific probes and quantified by phosphorimaging.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Bias in Template-to-Product Ratios in Multitemplate PCR
Martin F. Polz, Colleen M. Cavanaugh
Applied and Environmental Microbiology Oct 1998, 64 (10) 3724-3730; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.64.10.3724-3730.1998

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Applied and Environmental Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Bias in Template-to-Product Ratios in Multitemplate PCR
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Applied and Environmental Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Applied and Environmental Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Bias in Template-to-Product Ratios in Multitemplate PCR
Martin F. Polz, Colleen M. Cavanaugh
Applied and Environmental Microbiology Oct 1998, 64 (10) 3724-3730; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.64.10.3724-3730.1998
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Bacillus subtilis
DNA, Ribosomal
Escherichia coli
Polymerase Chain Reaction
RNA, Ribosomal, 16S
Templates, Genetic
Vibrio

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AEM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AppEnvMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

 

Print ISSN: 0099-2240; Online ISSN: 1098-5336