Missing the Match Might Not Cost You the Game: Primer-Template Mismatches Studied in Different Hepatitis A Virus Variants.

Authors:
Sofia Persson
Sofia Persson
Manchester Metropolitan University
Ronnie Eriksson
Ronnie Eriksson
Uppsala University and Academic Hospital
Sweden
Magnus Simonsson
Magnus Simonsson
Science Division
Pikesville | United States

Food Environ Virol 2019 Apr 19. Epub 2019 Apr 19.

European Union Reference Laboratory (EURL) for Foodborne Viruses, National Food Agency, Hamnesplanaden 5, 453 23, Uppsala, Sweden.

Mismatches between template sequences and reverse transcription (RT) or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) primers can lead to underestimation or false negative results during detection and quantification of sequence-diverse viruses. We performed an in silico inclusivity analysis of a widely used RT-PCR assay for detection of hepatitis A virus (HAV) in food, described in ISO 15216-1. One of the most common mismatches found was a single G (primer) to U (template) mismatch located at the terminal 3'-end of the reverse primer region. This mismatch was present in all genotype III sequences available in GenBank. Partial HAV genomes with common or potentially severe mismatches were produced by in vitro transcription and analysed using RT-ddPCR and RT-qPCR. When using standard conditions for RT-qPCR, the mismatch identified resulted in underestimation of the template concentration by a factor of 1.7-1.8 and an increase in 95% limit of detection from 8.6 to 19 copies/reaction. The effect of this mismatch was verified using full-length viral genomes. Here, the same mismatch resulted in underestimation of the template concentration by a factor of 2.8. For the partial genomes, the presence of additional mismatches resulted in underestimation of the template concentration by up to a factor of 232. Quantification by RT-ddPCR and RT-qPCR was equally affected during analysis of RNA templates with mismatches within the reverse primer region. However, on analysing DNA templates with the same mismatches, we found that ddPCR quantification was less affected by mismatches than qPCR due to the end-point detection technique.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12560-019-09387-z
Publisher Site
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12560-019-09387-zDOI Listing
April 2019
9 Reads

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

template concentration
12
concentration factor
12
underestimation template
12
hepatitis virus
8
rt-ddpcr rt-qpcr
8
primer region
8
reverse primer
8
mismatches
8
templates mismatches
8
template
5
mismatch
5
3'-end reverse
4
region mismatch
4
food described
4
equally analysis
4
mismatch genotype
4
described iso
4
mismatches underestimation
4
sequences genbank
4
genbank partial
4

References

(Supplied by CrossRef)

A Agresti et al.
2003
Article in Food Microbiology
C Bartsch et al.
Food Microbiology 2016
Article in Food and Environmental Virology
E Borgmastars et al.
Food and Environmental Virology 2017
Article in Current Opinion in Food Science
A Bosch et al.
Current Opinion in Food Science 2016
Article in Scientific Reports
KJ Bosman et al.
Scientific Reports 2015
Article in Journal of Molecular Endocrinology
S Bustin et al.
Journal of Molecular Endocrinology 2002
Article in Clinical Chemistry
SA Bustin et al.
Clinical Chemistry 2009
Article in Nucleic Acids Research
C Christopherson et al.
Nucleic Acids Research 1997
Article in Applied and Environment Microbiology
MI Costafreda et al.
Applied and Environment Microbiology 2006
Article in International Journal of Food Microbiology
C Coudray-Meunier et al.
International Journal of Food Microbiology 2015
Article in International Journal of Molecular Sciences
L D’Andrea et al.
International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2015

Similar Publications