1995
DOI: 10.1101/gr.4.4.219
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An evaluation of competitor type and size for use in the determination of mRNA by competitive PCR.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
63
1
1

Year Published

1997
1997
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 113 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
1
63
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar results, showing that shorter fragments amplify more efficiently in quantitative PCR, have been reported earlier. 27 The analysis of amplification efficiencies prevented the underestimation of LDLR mRNA levels in this study: a denaturation temperature of 94°C was initially used for LDLR PCRs, but after poor amplification efficiency of the target became evident, denaturation was performed at 96°C and amplification became efficient. The inefficient amplification of the LDLR target under the initial conditions was probably due to a high GC content of the LDLR gene (69% for the amplified fragment), which makes denaturation of the doublestranded DNA at 94°C incomplete.…”
Section: Competitive Pcrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similar results, showing that shorter fragments amplify more efficiently in quantitative PCR, have been reported earlier. 27 The analysis of amplification efficiencies prevented the underestimation of LDLR mRNA levels in this study: a denaturation temperature of 94°C was initially used for LDLR PCRs, but after poor amplification efficiency of the target became evident, denaturation was performed at 96°C and amplification became efficient. The inefficient amplification of the LDLR target under the initial conditions was probably due to a high GC content of the LDLR gene (69% for the amplified fragment), which makes denaturation of the doublestranded DNA at 94°C incomplete.…”
Section: Competitive Pcrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it is generally agreed that the most important factor determining overall amplification is related to the specific primers used. 5,14 Considering these factors, the IBD IC was designed to have priming sites identical to, and be larger in size than, the IBDV target template. Because the sequence of the control was required to be free of the restriction sites used in our RFLP analysis, the use of a modified (deletion/insertion) IBD genome segment was not practical.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Care should be taken when manipulating the size of the competitors because it could greatly influence the amplification efficiency. 56,57 Multispecific competitors, containing targets for several pairs of primers, corresponding to several GMOs, have also been designed, 58,59 but this technique should face the problem of the different amplification efficiencies of the target sequences with that of the common competitor.…”
Section: Qc-pcrmentioning
confidence: 99%