The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Heteroduplexes in mixed-template amplifications: formation, consequence and elimination by 'reconditioning PCR'
Open accessAbstract
Although it has been recognized that PCR amplification of mixed templates may generate sequence artifacts, the mechanisms of their formation, frequency and potential elimination have not been fully elucidated. Here evidence is presented for heteroduplexes as a major source of artifacts in mixed-template PCR. Nearly equal proportions of homoduplexes and heteroduplexes were observed after co-amplifying 16S rDNA from three bacterial genomes and analyzing products by constant denaturing capillary electrophoresis (CDCE). Heteroduplexes became increasingly prevalent as primers became limiting and/or template diversity was increased. A model exploring the fate of cloned heteroduplexes during MutHLS-mediated mismatch repair in the Escherichia coli host demonstrates that the diversity of artifactual sequences increases exponentially with the number of both variable nucleotides and of original sequence variants. Our model illustrates how minimization of heteroduplex molecules before cloning may reduce artificial genetic diversity detected during sequence analysis by clone screening. Thus, we developed a method to eliminate heteroduplexes from mixed-template PCR products by subjecting them to 'reconditioning PCR', a low cycle number re-amplification of a 10-fold diluted mixed-template PCR product. This simple modification to the protocol may ensure that sequence richness encountered in clone libraries more closely reflects genetic diversity in the original sample.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection
Edgar, R. C., Haas, B. J., Clemente, J. C., Quince, C., & Knight, R. (2011) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btr381 · Cited by 15,114
Dethlefsen, L., Huse, S., Sogin, M. L., & Relman, D. A. (2008) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060280 · Cited by 2,361
Reducing the Effects of PCR Amplification and Sequencing Artifacts on 16S rRNA-Based Studies
Schloss, P. D., Gevers, D., & Westcott, S. L. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027310 · Cited by 2,112
Fleming, S. J., Chaffin, M. D., Arduini, A., Akkad, A.-D., Banks, E., Marioni, J. C., Philippakis, A. A., Ellinor, P. T., & Babadi, M. (2023) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/s41592-023-01943-7 · Cited by 867
Inexpensive Multiplexed Library Preparation for Megabase-Sized Genomes
Baym, M., Kryazhimskiy, S., Lieberman, T. D., Chung, H., Desai, M. M., & Kishony, R. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0128036 · Cited by 685
Metadata
- Authors
- Thompson, J. R.
- Venue
- Nucleic Acids Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2002-05-01
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2083-2088
- ISSN
- 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
- 1362-4962
- OpenAlex
- W2157032655
- Cited by
- 448
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Heteroduplexes in mixed-template amplifications: formation, consequence and elimination by 'reconditioning PCR'. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/nar/30.9.2083
- The paper
- Thompson, J. R. (2002). Heteroduplexes in mixed-template amplifications: formation, consequence and elimination by 'reconditioning PCR'. Nucleic Acids Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/30.9.2083
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.