Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 233

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Specificity, efficiency, and fidelity of PCR.

Open access
Cha, R S, Thilly, W G·1993·Genome Research

Abstract

The efficacy of PCR is measured by its specificity, efficiency (i.e.yield), and fidelity.A highly specific PCR will generate one and only one amplification product that is the intended target sequence.More efficient amplification will generate more products with fewer cycles.A highly accurate (i.e., high-fidelity) PCR, will contain a negligible amount of DNA polymerase-induced errors in its product.An ideal PCR would be the one with high specificity, yield, and fidelity.Studies indicate that each of these three parameters is influenced by numerous components of PCR, including the buffer conditions, the PCR cycling regime (i.e., temperature and duration of each step), and DNA polymerases.Unfortunately, adjusting conditions for maximum specificity may not be compatible with high yield; likewise, optimizing for the fidelity of PCR may result in reduced efficiency.Thus, when setting up a PCR, one should know which of the three parameters is the most important for its intended application and optimize PCR accordingly.For instance, for direct sequencing analysis of a homogenous population of ceils (either by sequencing or by RFLP), the yield and specificity of PCR is more important than the fidelity.On the other hand, for studies of individual DNA molecules, or rare mutants in a heterogeneous population, fidelity of PCR is vital.The purpose of current communication is to focus on the essential components of setting up an effective PCR, and discuss how each of these component may influence the specificity, efficiency, and fidelity of PCR. SETTING UP PCR TemplateVirtually all forms of DNA and RNA are suitable substrates for PCR.These include genomic (both eukaryotic and prokaryotic), plasmid, and phage DNA and previously amplified DNA, cDNA, and mRNA.Samples prepared via standard molecular methodologies (1) are sufficiently pure for PCR, and usually no extra purification steps are required.Shearing of genomic DNA during DNA extraction does not affect the efficiency of PCR (at least for the fragments that are less than -2 kb).In some cases, rare restriction enzyme digestion of genomic DNA before PCR is suggested to increase the yield.(2'3) In general, the efficiency of PCR is greater for smaller size template DNA (i.e., previously amplified fragment, plasmid, or phage DNA), than high molecular (i.e., undigested eukaryotic genomic) DNA.Typically, 0.1-1 pLg of mammalian genomic DNA is utilized per P e R .(1'3'4-6) Assuming that a haploid mammalian genome (3x109 bp) weighs -3 .4 x 10-az grams, 1 ~g of genomic DNA corresponds to -3 x 10 s copies of autosomal genes.For bacterial genomic DNA or a plasmid DNA that represent much less complex genome, picogram (10 -12 grams) to nanogram (10 -9 grams) quantities are used per reaction.(1'3) Previously amplified DNA fragments have also been utilized as PCR templates.In general, gel purification of the amplified fragment is recommended before the second round of PCR.Purification of the amplified product is highly recommended if the initial PCR generated a number of unspecific bands or if a different set of primers (i.e., internal primers) is to be utilized for the subsequent PCR.On the other hand, if the amplification reaction contains only the intended target product, and the purpose of the subsequent PCR is simply to increase the overall yield utilizing the same set of primers, no further purification is required.One could simply take out a small aliquot of the original PCR mixture and subject it to a second round of PCR.In addition to the purified form of DNA, PCR from cells has also been demonstrated.In this laboratory, direct amplification of hprt exon 3 fragment from 1 • 10 s human cells (following proteinase treatment to open up the cells) had been carried out routinely (P.Keohavong, unpubl.). $18 PCR Methods and Applications3:$18-$29 9by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/gr.3.3.s18

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 233

Metadata

Authors
Cha, R. S., & Thilly, W. G.
Venue
Genome Research
Published
1993-12-01
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
S18-S29
ISSN
1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2032663425
Cited by
233
References
2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Specificity, efficiency, and fidelity of PCR. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/gr.3.3.s18
The paper
Cha, R. S., & Thilly, W. G. (1993). Specificity, efficiency, and fidelity of PCR. Genome Research. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.3.3.s18

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.