Interlaboratory comparison of real-time pcr protocols for quantification of general fecal indicator bacteria

Orin C. Shanks, Mano Sivaganesan, Lindsay Peed, Catherine A. Kelty, A. Denene Blackwood, Monica R. Greene, Rachel T. Noble, Rebecca N. Bushon, Erin A. Stelzer, Julie Kinzelman, Tamara Anan'Eva, Christopher Sinigalliano, David Wanless, John Griffith, Yiping Cao, Steve Weisberg, Valarie J. Harwood, Christopher Staley, Kevin H. Oshima, Manju VarmaRichard A. Haugland

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

64 Scopus citations

Abstract

The application of quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) technologies for the rapid identification of fecal bacteria in environmental waters is being considered for use as a national water quality metric in the United States. The transition from research tool to a standardized protocol requires information on the reproducibility and sources of variation associated with qPCR methodology across laboratories. This study examines interlaboratory variability in the measurement of enterococci and Bacteroidales concentrations from standardized, spiked, and environmental sources of DNA using the Entero1a and GenBac3 qPCR methods, respectively. Comparisons are based on data generated from eight different research facilities. Special attention was placed on the influence of the DNA isolation step and effect of simplex and multiplex amplification approaches on interlaboratory variability. Results suggest that a crude lysate is sufficient for DNA isolation unless environmental samples contain substances that can inhibit qPCR amplification. No appreciable difference was observed between simplex and multiplex amplification approaches. Overall, interlaboratory variability levels remained low (<10% coefficient of variation) regardless of qPCR protocol.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)945-953
Number of pages9
JournalEnvironmental Science and Technology
Volume46
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 17 2012

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Interlaboratory comparison of real-time pcr protocols for quantification of general fecal indicator bacteria'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this