Cited by 121Molecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsRNA Research and SplicingRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms

PCR inhibition by reverse transcriptase leads to an overestimation of amplification efficiency

Open access
Suslov, O.·2005·Nucleic Acids Research

Abstract

This study addresses the problem of PCR inhibition by reverse transcriptase. It has been shown that the inhibition occurs mostly when a small amount of RNA is taken for RT reaction, and it is more visible for rarely expressed transcripts. We show here that the inhibition takes place regardless of what amount of template is utilized for RT. The inhibition possesses a global nature, i.e. the amplification of any given transcript may be compromised with different levels of inhibition. The process of inhibition also explains wrongfully derived PCR amplification efficiencies, sometimes more than 100%, when the sequential dilutions of unpurified RT sample are utilized to build the calibration curve. The RT influences PCR not only by inhibiting it. When microgram(s) of RNA are taken for RT reaction, reverse transcriptase may cause overamplification of some transcripts under certain PCR conditions. The possible mechanism of RT influence on PCR is presented, and a purification method is implemented to remove the effects of RT on PCR.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/nar/gni176

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The root cause of poor quality qPCR data is typically inadequate dilution of residual protein and chemical contaminants that variably inhibit Taq polymerase and primer annealing.

    “The root cause of poor quality data is typically associated with inadequate dilution of residual protein and chemical contaminants that variably inhibit Taq polymerase and primer annealing.”

    From Droplet Digital PCR versus qPCR for gene expression analysis with low abundant targets: from variable nonsense to publication quality data (2017) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says residual reverse transcriptase can inhibit PCR and that dilution reduces this inhibition, supporting the concern about insufficient dilution of residual protein. It does not establish that this is typically the root cause of poor-quality qPCR data, or that chemical contaminants variably inhibit primer annealing. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In qPCR, components of the reverse transcription reaction can act as inhibitors of Taq polymerase, altering reaction efficiency and Cq values to give artifactual qPCR data if not adequately diluted.

    “However, in the case of miRNA and mRNA, the components of the reverse transcription (RT) reaction can also act as inhibitors of Taq polymerase, altering reaction efficiency and the associated Cq values to give artifactual qPCR data if not adequately diluted (Fig. 2)18.”

    From Droplet Digital PCR versus qPCR for gene expression analysis with low abundant targets: from variable nonsense to publication quality data (2017) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Introduction (page not available) says RT reaction components inhibit PCR and that extensive dilution is intended to minimize the effect. The Results (page not available) report altered Ct values in unpurified RT samples, and the Discussion links inhibition to misleading amplification efficiencies. The paper examines mRNA transcripts but does not establish the claim specifically for miRNA assays. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Subtle differences in the level of impurities between samples even under rigorous RNA extraction can alter Taq activity, imparting gross variability on resulting data.

    “However, there are frequently subtle differences in the level of impurities between samples even under highly rigorous RNA extraction procedures that can alter Taq activity, imparting gross variability on the resulting data18, 19.”

    From Droplet Digital PCR versus qPCR for gene expression analysis with low abundant targets: from variable nonsense to publication quality data (2017) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Results and Discussion (page not provided) show that residual reverse transcriptase can interfere with Taq polymerase and that purifying RT reactions reduces variability in real-time PCR. They do not establish that subtle differences in impurities between samples persist despite rigorous RNA extraction or cause gross variability. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [14]14. Pfaffl,M.W. (2004) Quantification strategies in real-time PCR. In Bustin,S.A. (ed.), A-Z of Quantitative PCR. International University Line, La Jolla, California, p.103.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Suslov, O.
Affiliations
University of Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Suslov, O.
Venue
Nucleic Acids Research
Published
2005-11-27
Volume
33
Issue
20
Pages
e181-e181
ISSN
  • 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-4962
OpenAlex
W2139173091
Cited by
121
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 10
FWCI
1.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Nucleic Acids Research (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL 70143, R01HL070143)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS 37556, R01NS037556)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Research and Splicing
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Keywords
reverse transcriptase, PCR inhibition, amplification efficiency, RNA purification, rare transcripts
MeSH terms
Ethanol, Pentanols, Chloroform, DNA, Humans, Chemical Precipitation, Reference Standards, RNA-Directed DNA Polymerase, Reproducibility of Results, DNA, Complementary, Phenol, Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction, Cell Line, Tumor

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