| Literature DB >> 15916714 |
Carol E Donald1, Fizza Qureshi, Malcolm J Burns, Marcia J Holden, Joseph R Blasic, Alison J Woolford.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The wide variety of real-time amplification platforms currently available has determined that standardisation of DNA measurements is a fundamental aspect involved in the comparability of results. Statistical analysis of the data arising from three different real-time platforms was conducted in order to assess inter-platform repeatability. On three consecutive days two PCR reaction mixes were used on each of the three amplification platforms - the LightCycler, ABI PRISM 7700 and Rotor Gene 3000. Real-time PCR amplification using a fluorogenic 5' exonuclease assay was performed in triplicate on negative controls and DNA plasmid dilutions of 108-102 copies to give a total of 24 reactions per PCR experiment.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2005 PMID: 15916714 PMCID: PMC1168890 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6750-5-15
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Biotechnol ISSN: 1472-6750 Impact factor: 2.563
Comparison of repeatability estimates of the PCR measurements using different reaction mixes and platforms over three days (using standard deviations of the Ct value).
| Repeatability Estimates (standard deviations of the Ct value) based on Individual Plasmid Copy Number | ||||||
| Plasmid Copy Number | Platform and PCR Reaction Mix | |||||
| ABI 7700 | LightCycler | RotorGene | ||||
| Excite | FastStart | Excite | FastStart | Excite | FastStart | |
| 102 | 0.543 | 0.182 | 0.568 | 0.233 | 0.888 | 0.186 |
| 103 | 0.452 | 0.204 | 1.177 | 0.190 | 0.184 | 0.445 |
| 104 | 0.223 | 0.305 | 1.123 | 0.100 | 0.256 | 0.592 |
| 105 | 0.243 | 0.168 | 0.947 | 0.224 | 0.209 | 0.221 |
| 106 | 0.362 | 0.183 | 1.378 | 0.281 | 0.772 | 0.333 |
| 107 | 0.473 | 0.189 | 0.919 | 0.156 | 0.319 | 0.247 |
| 108 | 0.236 | 0.184 | 0.454 | 0.352 | 0.322 | 0.166 |
| Degrees of Freedom | 6–8 | 6 | 6–8 | 5–6 | 6–8 | 6 |
| Mean | 0.362 | 0.202 | 0.938 | 0.219 | 0.421 | 0.313 |
| Standard Deviation | 0.130 | 0.047 | 0.331 | 0.082 | 0.286 | 0.156 |
(Note that one replicate is missing for the LC platform coupled with the Fast Start reaction mix – the capillary broke).
Variation attributable to day, plasmid copy number, PCR reaction mix and platform following an ANOVA test using threshold cycle number (Ct) as the variable factor.
| Day | 96.0 | 2 | 48.0 | 221.4 | <0.00001 |
| Plasmid Copies | 12919.2 | 6 | 2153.2 | 9932.0 | <0.00001 |
| PCR Reaction Mix | 75.0 | 1 | 75.0 | 346.2 | <0.00001 |
| Platform | 700.5 | 2 | 350.2 | 1615.5 | <0.00001 |
| Day with Plasmid Copies | 53.2 | 12 | 4.4 | 20.5 | <0.00001 |
| Day with PCR Reaction Mix | 1.9 | 2 | 0.9 | 4.3 | 0.01442 |
| Plasmid Copies with PCR Reaction Mix | 8.5 | 6 | 1.4 | 6.5 | <0.00001 |
| Day with Platform | 130.8 | 4 | 32.7 | 150.8 | <0.00001 |
| Plasmid Copies with Platform | 51.0 | 12 | 4.2 | 19.6 | <0.00001 |
| PCR Reaction Mix with Platform | 1.7 | 2 | 0.9 | 4.0 | 0.01901 |
| Day with Plasmid Copies with PCR Reaction Mix | 14.6 | 12 | 1.2 | 5.6 | <0.00001 |
| Day with Plasmid copies with Platform | 18.3 | 24 | 0.8 | 3.5 | <0.00001 |
| Day with PCR Reaction Mix with Platform | 49.6 | 4 | 12.4 | 57.1 | <0.00001 |
| Plasmid copies with PCR Reaction Mix with Platform | 4.5 | 12 | 0.4 | 1.7 | 0.06337 |
| Day with Plasmid Copies with PCR Reaction Mix with Platform | 11.8 | 24 | 0.5 | 2.3 | 0.00091 |
| Error | 54.4 | 251 | 0.2 | ||
(Where SS = sum of squares; DF = degrees of freedom; MS = Mean Square; F = ratio of variances; p = probability of obtaining a specific result, given by the null hypothesis).
Figure 1Average threshold cycle number (Ct) plotted against plasmid copy number. The data have been pooled from each platform, PCR reaction mix and day to give an average Ct value. Linear regression performed on the ploted data values from this graph determined that the gradient was -2.92 and that the amplification efficiency [21] was greater than two. However the amplification efficiency cannot be greater than two since PCR is an exponential reaction where the amount of product doubles at each cycle.
Figure 2Average threshold cycle number (Ct) plotted against day for each plasmid dilution illustrating the interaction of day and plasmid copies. The data have been pooled from each platform, PCR reaction mix and plasmid dilution.
Figure 3Average threshold cycle number (Ct) plotted against day for each platform illustrating the interaction of day and platform. The data have been pooled from each PCR reaction mix and plasmid dilution.