Hubbry Logo
Hybridization probeHybridization probeMain
Open search
Hybridization probe
Community hub
Hybridization probe
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Hybridization probe
Hybridization probe
Hybridization probe
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In molecular biology, a hybridization probe (HP) is a fragment of DNA or RNA, usually 15–10000 nucleotides long, which can be radioactively or fluorescently labeled. HPs can be used to detect the presence of nucleotide sequences in analyzed RNA or DNA that are complementary to the sequence in the probe.[1] The labeled probe is first denatured (by heating or under alkaline conditions such as exposure to sodium hydroxide) into single stranded DNA (ssDNA) and then hybridized to the target ssDNA (Southern blotting) or RNA (northern blotting) immobilized on a membrane or in situ.

To detect hybridization of the probe to its target sequence, the probe is tagged (or "labeled") with a molecular marker of either radioactive or (more recently) fluorescent molecules. Commonly used markers are 32P (a radioactive isotope of phosphorus incorporated into the phosphodiester bond in the probe DNA), digoxigenin, a non-radioactive, antibody-based marker, biotin or fluorescein. DNA sequences or RNA transcripts that have moderate to high sequence similarity to the probe are then detected by visualizing the hybridized probe via autoradiography or other imaging techniques. Normally, either X-ray pictures are taken of the filter, or the filter is placed under UV light. Detection of sequences with moderate or high similarity depends on how stringent the hybridization conditions were applied—high stringency, such as high hybridization temperature and low salt in hybridization buffers, permits only hybridization between nucleic acid sequences that are highly similar, whereas low stringency, such as lower temperature and high salt, allows hybridization when the sequences are less similar.

Hybridization probes used in DNA microarrays refer to DNA covalently attached to an inert surface, such as coated glass slides or gene chips, to which a mobile cDNA target is hybridized. Depending on the method, the probe may be synthesized using the phosphoramidite method, or it can be generated and labeled by PCR amplification or cloning (both are older methods). In order to increase the in vivo stability of the probe RNA is not used. Instead, RNA analogues may be used, in particular morpholino- derivatives. Molecular DNA- or RNA-based probes are routinely used in screening gene libraries, detecting nucleotide sequences with blotting methods, and in other gene technologies, such as nucleic acid and tissue microarrays.

Examples of probes

[edit]

Uses in microbial ecology

[edit]

Within the field of microbial ecology, oligonucleotide probes are used in order to determine the presence of microbial species, genera, or microorganisms classified on a more broad level, such as bacteria, archaea, and eukaryotes via fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH).[2] rRNA probes have enabled scientists to visualize microorganisms, yet to be cultured in laboratory settings, by retrieval of rRNA sequences directly from the environment.[3] Examples of these types of microorganisms include:

  • Nevskia ramosa: N. ramosa is a neuston bacterium that forms typical, dichotomically-branching rosettes on the surface of shallow freshwater habitats.[4]
  • Achromatium oxaliferum: This huge bacterium (cell length up to >100 μm, diameter up to 50 μm) contains sulfur globules and massive calcite inclusions and inhabits the upper layers of freshwater sediments. It is visible to the naked eye and has, by its resistance to cultivation, puzzled generations of microbiologists.[5]

Limitations

[edit]

In some instances, differentiation between species may be problematic when using 16S rRNA sequences due to similarity. In such instances, 23S rRNA may be a better alternative.[6] The global standard library of rRNA sequences is constantly becoming larger and continuously being updated, and thus the possibility of a random hybridization event between a specifically-designed probe (based on complete and current data from a range of test organisms) and an undesired/unknown target organism cannot be easily dismissed.[7] On the contrary, it is plausible that there exist microorganisms, yet to be identified, which are phylogenetically members of a probe target group, but have partial or near-perfect target sites, usually applies when designing group-specific probes.

Probably the greatest practical limitation to this technique is the lack of available automation.[8]

Use in forensic science

[edit]

In forensic science, hybridization probes are used, for example, for detection of short tandem repeats (microsatellite) regions[9] and in restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) methods, all of which are widely used as part of DNA profiling analysis.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Hybridization probe

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A hybridization probe, also known as a nucleic acid probe, is a short, single-stranded segment of DNA or RNA designed to be complementary to a specific target nucleic acid sequence, binding to it through base-pairing hydrogen bonds in a process called hybridization to enable detection and analysis of the target in biological samples. These probes are typically labeled with a detectable marker, such as a fluorophore for fluorescence-based detection, a radioactive isotope for autoradiography, or an enzyme for colorimetric readout, allowing visualization, localization, or quantification of the hybridized target sequence. The foundational technique employing hybridization probes, in situ hybridization (ISH), was pioneered in 1968 when Joseph G. Gall and Mary Lou Pardue used a tritiated (³H-labeled) probe to detect amplified ribosomal DNA genes in (Xenopus laevis) oocytes, marking the first demonstration of within cellular structures. This breakthrough evolved rapidly; by the early , non-radioactive fluorescent probes were introduced, leading to (FISH) in the 1980s, which improved resolution, safety, and multiplexing capabilities for chromosomal and genomic studies. Over decades, refinements in probe design and labeling have expanded their utility from basic research to clinical diagnostics, with ongoing innovations like (LNA) modifications enhancing specificity and stability. Recent innovations as of 2025 include modular single-stranded DNA probes for customizable and computational tools for designing quantitative single-molecule RNA-FISH probes, improving resolution and throughput. Hybridization probes vary by composition and structure to suit diverse applications, including double-stranded DNA probes (denatured before use), single-stranded DNA probes, riboprobes (synthesized via transcription for higher stability), and synthetic probes (short, chemically synthesized sequences for precise targeting). Specialized subtypes include FRET-based Hybprobes (using donor-acceptor pairs for real-time signal changes), molecular probes (stem-loop structures that fluoresce upon target binding), and hydrolysis probes like (which release a during PCR extension for quantitative detection). These probes are integral to techniques such as ISH and FISH for mapping s on chromosomes, detecting chromosomal aberrations in cancers, and visualizing mRNA expression in tissues; genomic ISH (GISH) for distinguishing parental chromosomes in hybrids; and real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) for amplifying and measuring loads or copy numbers with high sensitivity. In clinical settings, they facilitate prenatal genetic screening, infectious disease diagnosis (e.g., SARS-CoV detection), and by identifying biomarkers for targeted therapies.

Fundamentals

Definition and Basic Principles

A hybridization is a short, single-stranded , typically DNA or , or a synthetic analog thereof, designed to bind specifically to a complementary target in a biological sample via base-pairing interactions. These probes are engineered with lengths usually ranging from 15 to several hundred to ensure high specificity and sensitivity in detecting target sequences. The function of hybridization probes relies on fundamental principles of nucleic acid structure and complementarity. Nucleic acids consist of nucleotide monomers, each containing a phosphate backbone, a deoxyribose (in DNA) or ribose (in RNA) sugar, and one of four nitrogenous bases: adenine (A), thymine (T) or uracil (U), cytosine (C), and guanine (G). Complementarity arises from specific hydrogen bonding between these bases—A pairs with T (or U in RNA) via two hydrogen bonds, and G pairs with C via three—allowing single-stranded probes to anneal to matching target strands, forming stable double-stranded hybrids under appropriate conditions of temperature, salt concentration, and pH. This base-pairing mechanism ensures that probes hybridize selectively to homologous sequences, distinguishing them from non-complementary regions in complex genomic or transcriptomic samples. Hybridization probes emerged in the late 1960s as tools for detecting specific DNA sequences, with early applications in using radiolabeled probes to visualize in frog oocytes. A pivotal advancement occurred in 1975 with Edwin Southern's development of the technique, which separated DNA fragments by , transferred them to a , and used labeled probes to identify specific sequences, laying the groundwork for modern detection methods. In molecular biology, hybridization probes play a central role in the identification, quantification, and localization of target nucleic acids within heterogeneous samples, such as genomic DNA, RNA transcripts, or microbial communities. By incorporating detectable labels, these probes facilitate visualization or measurement of hybridization events, enabling applications from gene expression analysis to pathogen detection without prior sequence knowledge of the entire sample. For instance, fluorescently labeled probes can highlight specific chromosomal regions, providing spatial resolution in cellular contexts.

Hybridization Mechanism

The hybridization mechanism of probes to target nucleic acids is a fundamental biochemical process that enables specific detection in molecular biology techniques. It begins with the denaturation of the target DNA or RNA, where double-stranded targets are heated or chemically treated to disrupt hydrogen bonds and base stacking interactions, separating the strands into single-stranded forms. This step is essential to expose the complementary sequences for probe binding. Following denaturation, the annealing phase occurs as the probe, typically a short single-stranded oligonucleotide, aligns with its complementary target sequence through Watson-Crick base pairing (adenine-thymine or guanine-cytosine). The process is driven by non-covalent interactions, primarily hydrogen bonds between complementary bases, which initiate the formation of the probe-target duplex. Once annealed, the hybrid stabilizes through additional hydrogen bonding (typically two for A-T pairs and three for G-C pairs) and base stacking forces, forming a stable double helix. The thermodynamic stability of this duplex is quantified by the melting temperature (Tm), the point at which half of the hybrids dissociate. For short probes (under nucleotides), Tm can be approximated using the Wallace rule: Tm=4(G+C)+2(A+T)T_m = 4(G + C) + 2(A + T) °C, where G, C, A, and T represent the number of each base in the probe. This highlights the greater stability contributed by G-C pairs due to their additional . Probe length influences stability, with longer sequences generally exhibiting higher Tm values owing to increased interaction sites, while salt concentration modulates electrostatic repulsion between negatively charged backbones—higher (e.g., NaCl) shields these charges and enhances duplex formation by reducing the free energy penalty. Specificity in hybridization arises from the precise matching of base pairs, but single-base mismatches significantly impair efficiency by destabilizing the duplex. Such mismatches, like G-T or A-C wobbles, lower the Tm by 5–15°C depending on position and type, reducing binding affinity and potentially causing false negatives in detection or false positives if non-specific binding occurs under low-stringency conditions. Internal mismatches have a more pronounced destabilizing effect than terminal ones, as they disrupt stacking throughout the . To enhance specificity, stringency conditions are applied post-hybridization, particularly through washing steps that remove weakly bound probes. These are controlled by elevating (approaching the Tm of mismatched hybrids) or lowering , which increases the energy barrier for non-specific interactions while preserving perfectly matched duplexes. RNA probes may exhibit slightly different hybridization kinetics compared to DNA probes due to the 2'-OH group influencing helix flexibility, though the core mechanism remains base-pairing driven.

Types and Labeling

Types of Probes

Hybridization probes are primarily categorized based on their chemical composition and structural features, which influence their stability, specificity, and binding properties. Nucleic acid-based probes, the most conventional type, include DNA and RNA variants that hybridize directly to complementary nucleic acid targets through Watson-Crick base pairing. DNA probes consist of synthetic oligonucleotides or amplified fragments that offer high chemical stability and ease of large-scale synthesis via automated phosphoramidite chemistry, making them suitable for routine applications where nuclease resistance is beneficial. In contrast, RNA probes, often generated by in vitro transcription, exhibit greater thermodynamic stability in RNA-RNA hybrids due to the 2'-hydroxyl groups on the ribose sugar, which enable additional hydrogen bonding and higher specificity in base pairing compared to DNA probes; however, they are highly susceptible to degradation by ubiquitous RNases, necessitating careful handling and protective measures during use. Nucleic acid analogs represent modified probes designed to overcome limitations of natural nucleic acids, such as low binding affinity or poor cellular penetration. Peptide nucleic acid (PNA) probes feature a neutral peptide backbone composed of N-(2-aminoethyl)glycine units linked by amide bonds, replacing the negatively charged phosphodiester backbone of DNA or RNA; this neutrality eliminates electrostatic repulsion with targets, resulting in higher binding affinity and faster hybridization kinetics to both single- and double-stranded nucleic acids. Locked nucleic acid (LNA) probes incorporate bicyclic furanose monomers with a 2'-O,4'-C methylene bridge, constraining the sugar ring in a C3'-endo conformation that mimics RNA; this modification dramatically increases duplex stability, allowing effective hybridization with short sequences (as few as 8-10 nucleotides) and improving mismatch discrimination for precise targeting. Specialized structural variants expand the functionality of hybridization probes beyond linear sequences. Molecular beacon probes are hairpin-shaped oligonucleotides with a stem-loop structure, where the loop region is complementary to the target and the stem holds a and quencher in close proximity; upon target binding, the hairpin unfolds, separating the from the quencher to produce a detectable signal. These probes are often conjugated with fluorescent tags or other labels to enable detection, as detailed in subsequent sections on labeling techniques.

Labeling Techniques

Labeling techniques for hybridization probes involve the incorporation of detectable tags into sequences to enable visualization or quantification of specific hybridization events. These methods allow for the identification of target sequences in techniques such as Southern blotting, Northern blotting, and . Common approaches include radioactive, fluorescent, and non-radioactive enzymatic or hapten-based labeling, each offering distinct advantages in sensitivity, safety, and compatibility with detection systems. Radioactive labeling utilizes isotopes such as phosphorus-32 (³²P) or sulfur-35 (³⁵S) to tag probes, providing high sensitivity for detecting low-abundance targets. Incorporation occurs through methods like end-labeling, where T4 polynucleotide kinase adds ³²P to the 5' terminus using [γ-³²P]ATP, or nick translation, which employs DNase I to create nicks in the DNA followed by DNA polymerase I to replace segments with radiolabeled nucleotides. Detection relies on autoradiography, where β-particle emissions expose photographic film, yielding high-resolution images suitable for quantitative analysis. While this approach achieves specific activities up to 10⁹ cpm/μg, enabling detection of single-copy genes in complex genomes, it poses hazards due to radiation exposure and requires specialized waste disposal. Fluorescent labeling attaches organic fluorophores directly to probes for optical detection, facilitating real-time monitoring and multiplexing in applications like (FISH). Common fluorophores include (FITC) and dyes such as Cy3, which are covalently linked via (NHS) ester chemistry to amine-modified during or after synthesis. This reaction targets primary amines on bases like dT, forming stable bonds under mild aqueous conditions. Detection involves excitation with specific wavelengths (e.g., 488 nm for FITC, 550 nm for Cy3) and emission capture via fluorescence microscopy or scanners, enabling Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) in probe pairs for enhanced specificity. Fluorescent methods are safer than radioactive alternatives and support multicolor imaging, though signal intensity may be lower without amplification, potentially limiting detection of sparse targets. Enzymatic labeling employs haptens such as or digoxigenin, which are incorporated into probes via enzymatic methods like random priming or (TdT) tailing with modified (e.g., biotin-11-dUTP). These haptens are then amplified through binding to or anti-digoxigenin antibodies conjugated to enzymes like (HRP). Detection occurs via chemiluminescent substrates, where HRP catalyzes the oxidation of derivatives to produce light, captured on film or digital imagers, or chromogenic substrates for colorimetric output. This indirect approach achieves signal amplification comparable to radioactive methods while avoiding , making it suitable for routine use; however, it can introduce if non-specific binding is not controlled. Comparisons among these techniques highlight trade-offs in performance and practicality. Radioactive labeling offers the highest sensitivity and resolution but is hazardous and declining in use due to regulatory constraints. Non-radioactive methods, including fluorescent and enzymatic approaches, are safer, more stable for long-term storage, and compatible with automated detection systems, though they may require amplification for equivalent signal strength. Selection depends on the experimental context, with (PNA) probes particularly amenable to fluorescent tags for their stability.

Design and Preparation

Probe Design Considerations

Effective design of hybridization probes begins with careful sequence selection to ensure specificity and minimize off-target binding. Probes should target unique regions of the to avoid cross-hybridization with non-target sequences, which can be assessed using tools like BLAST to identify homologous regions and confirm exclusivity. Additionally, sequences prone to secondary structures, such as hairpins or loops, must be avoided, as these can hinder probe accessibility and hybridization efficiency; computational prediction of folding energies helps in selecting linear, unstructured candidates. Probe length and base composition are optimized to achieve stable yet specific hybridization under controlled conditions. Typical oligonucleotide probes range from 15 to 50 in length, balancing sensitivity with the ability to discriminate mismatches; shorter probes (around 18-25 nt) enhance specificity for single-nucleotide variants, while longer ones improve signal strength for low-abundance targets. A of 40-60% is preferred to yield a melting (Tm) of approximately 50-60°C, promoting efficient annealing without excessive stringency that could reduce yield. This Tm range aligns with principles of , where balanced base pairing ensures reversible binding. For applications involving genetic variation, such as (SNP) detection, probes are engineered with mismatch tolerance in mind. Designs often position the variant site centrally to maximize destabilization from a single mismatch, allowing differentiation between alleles through altered hybridization stability; this is particularly effective in techniques like hybridization. Computational tools streamline these design parameters by integrating , thermodynamic modeling, and specificity checks. Software like Primer3 enables selection of probes with optimal , , and low secondary structure propensity, while also suggesting hybridization oligos for qPCR applications. Similarly, OligoAnalyzer predicts Tm, dimer formation, and self-complementarity, facilitating iterative refinement for high-efficiency probes. These tools, grounded in empirical data, reduce experimental trial-and-error and enhance overall probe performance.

Synthesis Methods

Hybridization probes, primarily consisting of short or molecules, are synthesized through several established laboratory techniques that ensure high purity and specificity for downstream applications. The most common method for producing DNA-based probes is via the solid-phase approach, which assembles sequentially from the 3' to 5' direction on a solid support. This method, pioneered by Beaucage and Caruthers in , utilizes protected monomers that couple to the growing chain after deprotection of the 5'-hydroxyl group, followed by oxidation and capping steps to minimize failure sequences. Automated synthesizers, such as the Model 380A introduced by in 1983, have revolutionized production by enabling rapid, scalable synthesis of probes up to 100 in length, with efficiencies often exceeding 98% per cycle. Synthesis parameters, including probe length typically limited to 15-50 for optimal hybridization stability, directly influence yield and are determined during the phase. Emerging enzymatic synthesis methods, as of 2025, offer alternatives to traditional chemical approaches for de novo oligonucleotide production. These techniques employ template-independent DNA polymerases, such as (TdT), to add sequentially without a solid-phase support, enabling the synthesis of longer sequences (up to 300 ) with higher purity and reduced . Refinements in enzyme engineering and chemoenzymatic ligation have improved fidelity and scalability, making this suitable for custom probe generation in and therapeutics. For RNA-based hybridization probes, known as riboprobes, in vitro transcription provides an efficient means to generate single-stranded RNA from DNA templates. This process employs bacteriophage RNA polymerases, particularly T7 RNA polymerase, which initiates transcription specifically from a T7 promoter sequence upstream of the target gene insert. The DNA template is typically a linearized plasmid or PCR amplicon containing the promoter and the antisense or sense strand of the target sequence; transcription occurs in the presence of ribonucleotide triphosphates, producing high yields of RNA (up to 100-200 μg per reaction) in 1-2 hours at 37°C. This method, adapted from early protocols for bacteriophage polymerases, allows incorporation of modified nucleotides during synthesis to enhance probe stability or enable direct labeling. Cloning-based production amplifies DNA templates in bacterial hosts for large-scale probe generation, particularly when radioactive labeling is required for high-sensitivity detection. The target sequence is inserted into a plasmid vector with a T7 (or SP6/T3) promoter, transformed into E. coli, and propagated to yield milligram quantities of plasmid DNA. The purified plasmid is then linearized and subjected to in vitro transcription as described, incorporating radiolabeled nucleotides like [α-³²P]UTP to produce high specific activity probes (10⁸-10⁹ cpm/μg) suitable for blotting or in situ hybridization. This approach, building on recombinant DNA techniques from the 1970s, remains valuable for producing probes from complex genomic regions where chemical synthesis is impractical due to length or sequence complexity. Regardless of the synthesis method, rigorous is essential to ensure probe integrity and performance. Crude products are purified by reverse-phase (HPLC), which separates full-length probes from truncated failures based on hydrophobicity, achieving purities >90% for therapeutic-grade . For smaller-scale or probes, (PAGE) under denaturing conditions resolves species by size, allowing excision and elution of the desired band. Verification involves , such as (ESI-MS), to confirm molecular weight and detect modifications, or for purity assessment, ensuring minimal impurities like n-1 deletions that could compromise hybridization specificity. Sequencing may be used for longer probes to validate the entire sequence.

Applications in Biology and Medicine

Diagnostic Applications

Hybridization probes play a crucial role in clinical diagnostics by enabling the specific detection of nucleic acid sequences associated with diseases, facilitating rapid and accurate identification in patient samples such as blood, swabs, or biopsies. These probes hybridize to target DNA or RNA, often amplified via PCR, to signal the presence of pathogens or genetic abnormalities through fluorescence, colorimetry, or other readouts, improving sensitivity and specificity over traditional methods. In diagnostic settings, they support point-of-care testing and large-scale screening, reducing turnaround times and enabling personalized medicine approaches. In pathogen detection, hybridization probes are widely used to identify viral and bacterial infections in clinical samples. For instance, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) methods employing short DNA probes (40-50 nucleotides) target SARS-CoV-2 mRNAs, such as the spike (S) and envelope (E) genes, allowing visualization and quantification in nasopharyngeal swabs or cell cultures within 2 hours, which enhances early COVID-19 diagnosis and reduces false negatives compared to RT-PCR alone. Similarly, probe capture enrichment techniques hybridize sequence-specific probes to HIV-1 RNA, followed by PCR and next-generation sequencing, enabling detection in low-viral-load plasma samples (as low as 3.5 log copies/mL) and supporting drug resistance genotyping for antiretroviral therapy monitoring. These approaches extend to bacterial pathogens, where probes hybridize to amplified 16S rRNA sequences in blood or tissue samples for sepsis diagnostics, providing rapid identification without culturing. For screening, hybridization probes target specific in genes like CFTR, associated with . The reverse dot blot (RDB) hybridization method uses biotinylated PCR products from patient DNA that hybridize to immobilized probes on a , detecting common such as ΔF508 (prevalent in up to 21.6% of alleles in certain populations) through colorimetric detection, offering a simple, non-radioactive tool for carrier screening and prenatal diagnosis in clinical labs. This technique allows simultaneous analysis of multiple , improving efficiency in high-throughput settings and aiding . In cancer diagnostics, hybridization probes assess amplification in tumor biopsies to guide targeted therapies. Fluorescent (FISH) probes specific to the HER2 gene and chromosome 17 centromere (CEP17) quantify amplification by measuring the HER2/CEP17 ratio and gene copy number, classifying breast cancer samples as positive (ratio ≥2.0 and copies ≥4.0), equivocal, or negative per ASCO-CAP guidelines, which is essential for identifying patients eligible for HER2-targeted drugs like , as amplified cases show improved disease-free survival (HR 0.71). This method's precision in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues ensures reliable prognostic stratification. Commercial implementations, such as probes in quantitative PCR (qPCR) kits, exemplify widespread diagnostic utility. These 5'-nuclease probes, labeled with a and quencher, hybridize to target sequences during amplification, releasing upon for real-time quantification; dual-probe systems mitigate mutation-induced false negatives, as demonstrated in detecting or equine arteritis virus strains in veterinary diagnostics, and are adapted for human applications like viral load monitoring in or kits from manufacturers like or Thermo Fisher. Such kits enable sensitive, automated testing in clinical workflows, supporting infectious and outbreak response.

Research and Ecological Uses

Hybridization probes play a crucial role in analysis through DNA microarrays, enabling the measurement of mRNA levels across thousands of genes simultaneously in model organisms. These arrays consist of immobilized probes that hybridize to complementary cDNA derived from mRNA, allowing quantitative assessment of transcript abundance under various conditions. For instance, in , microarrays have been used to map genome-wide transcription patterns, revealing dynamic changes in during cellular responses. Similarly, in Caenorhabditis elegans, they facilitate high-resolution profiling to study developmental and stress-related expression. This approach, pioneered in seminal works like DeRisi et al. (1997), has become a cornerstone for understanding regulatory networks in model systems. In microbial ecology, 16S rRNA-targeted hybridization probes, often combined with (FISH), are essential for identifying and quantifying unculturable in complex environmental samples such as and waters. These probes bind specifically to sequences, enabling visualization and enumeration of microbial taxa that cannot be grown in culture, which comprise the majority of environmental diversity. For example, in pelagic samples, FISH probes targeting the SAR86 cluster revealed abundances up to 10% of total bacterial cells, highlighting their ecological significance despite being unculturable. In biofilms and seawater communities, live-FISH variants allow sorting and isolation of viable cells, such as from samples, aiding in the study of community dynamics and interactions. Additionally, probes derived from metagenomic data, like R-Probes, target novel unculturable taxa in sludge biofilms, achieving high specificity for taxa absent from reference databases. Hybridization probes also support evolutionary studies by detecting conserved sequences across species through on high-density arrays. These probes interrogate homologous regions, identifying stretches of sequence identity that indicate functional conservation. A key application involves sequencing orthologous genes, such as the human , in like chimpanzees and , where arrays achieve over 99% accuracy for regions with 97% or higher identity, revealing conserved tracts as short as 15 . This method, demonstrated in early high-throughput comparisons, has informed evolutionary divergence and primer design for cross-species analyses. Despite these advances, hybridization probes in ecological applications face limitations, particularly in detecting low-abundance targets, which demand high sensitivity to avoid false negatives. In microbial communities, rare taxa often represent less than 1% of total , leading to inefficient hybridization due to limited target availability and secondary structures in long rRNA molecules. For instance, unfragmented 16S rRNA targets yield only 13.9% probe efficiency, with up to 57.8% false negatives, necessitating fragmentation to 20-100 or PCR amplification to enhance detection, though the latter introduces biases. In situ techniques like FISH further require signal amplification to resolve these low-abundance signals in environmental matrices.

Applications in Forensics and Other Fields

Forensic Applications

Hybridization probes play a crucial role in forensic by targeting specific short tandem repeat (STR) loci, such as those defined in the (CODIS), to generate unique genetic profiles for suspect identification. Early methods employed single-locus probes—short or sequences labeled with radioactive isotopes—in Southern blotting to hybridize to restriction fragments containing variable number tandem repeats (VNTRs), allowing visualization of band patterns via autoradiography that distinguish individuals based on lengths at VNTR loci. More contemporary approaches employ hybridization probes in real-time PCR assays, such as QueSTR probes, which are dual-labeled that enable allele-specific detection of CODIS core STR loci (e.g., TH01, TPOX) through fluorescence and , offering higher sensitivity for compared to . Similarly, STRide probes, single-labeled fluorescent , facilitate STR by exploiting quenching on fluorescein, providing a hybridization-based alternative for rapid profiling in criminal investigations. Recent advances include improved hybridization-capture probe designs for enriching targeted sequences in bio-forensic metagenomic samples, enhancing detection of low-abundance taxa in complex or degraded evidence as of 2025. In victim identification, particularly from mass disasters or degraded remains, hybridization probes target mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) to recover maternal lineage profiles when nuclear DNA is insufficient. Hybridization enrichment using biotinylated probes coupled with massively parallel sequencing (MPS) captures mtDNA fragments as short as 30 base pairs, enabling full genome recovery from skeletal samples over 70 years old, with success rates up to 45% in a single enrichment round for European and Southeast Asian remains. This method outperforms traditional PCR-Sanger sequencing by tolerating low input DNA quantities (as low as 0.1 ng) and inhibitors common in bone or teeth, allowing comparison to reference databases for positive identification in cases like plane crashes or war atrocities. For paternity testing in forensic contexts, Y-chromosome-specific hybridization probes aid lineage analysis by targeting male-specific markers, confirming paternal relationships without the alleged father's sample in some scenarios. Probes designed for Y-chromosomal minisatellites or short tandem repeats (Y-STRs) hybridize to amplified products, enabling detection of matches that trace paternal descent, as demonstrated in studies using multi-locus probes for disputed paternity cases where autosomal markers are inconclusive due to limited samples. Such probes, often integrated with PCR, provide high specificity for male lineages, supporting legal determinations in or assault-related disputes. Despite these advances, hybridization probes in forensic applications face significant challenges, including handling low-quantity evidence where DNA inputs below 0.1 ng lead to incomplete profiles or allelic dropout, necessitating enrichment techniques like probe capture to boost yield from degraded sources. Contamination risks are heightened during probe hybridization, as non-specific binding or carryover from radioactive or fluorescent labels can introduce artifacts mimicking true signals, requiring stringent controls such as multiple negative samples and post-hybridization washes to ensure evidentiary integrity. Additionally, environmental degradation in crime scene samples exacerbates issues with probe efficiency, prompting the use of magnetic bead-based hybridization to selectively recover target sequences amid inhibitors.

Industrial and Environmental Uses

Hybridization probes play a critical role in food safety by enabling the detection of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and pathogens in agricultural products and processed foods. For GMO screening, padlock probes are ligated to target genomic DNA sequences specific to GMO events, elements, or species, followed by PCR amplification and microarray hybridization for visualization. This multiplex approach detects GMO content as low as 0.1% in complex samples like soy or maize derivatives, supporting regulatory compliance in raw material testing and product labeling. Similarly, probes targeting pathogen-specific genes, such as the invA gene in Salmonella, are used in PCR-hybridization assays to identify contamination in food matrices like meat and dairy. These methods achieve sensitivities of 0.2 CFU/g after short pre-enrichment, allowing rapid screening of large sample volumes in industrial settings. Real-time PCR variants incorporating hybridization probes further enhance accuracy, demonstrating 97-100% diagnostic sensitivity across diverse foods and animal feeds while reducing detection time compared to traditional culture methods. In , hybridization probes facilitate the monitoring of microbial communities responsible for degrading environmental pollutants, particularly in scenarios. Functional gene arrays employing thousands of probes target genes involved in metabolism, such as those for and degradation, to track shifts in microbial diversity during treatment of contaminated aquifers. These arrays reveal early selection of core degraders, including both aerobic and anaerobic species, with progressive increases in functional gene abundance as bioremediation progresses. (FISH) techniques, including catalyzed reporter deposition (CARD-FISH), use rRNA-targeted probes to quantify hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria like Marinobacter directly in sediment or water samples from spill sites. Optimized for hydrocarbon-rich environments, CARD-FISH protocols detect these microbes at low abundances, providing spatial and temporal data on their role in pollutant breakdown without culturing biases. Group-specific 16S rRNA probes for genera like Marinobacter enable enumeration in marine oil plumes, correlating their proliferation with enhanced degradation rates post-spill. Pharmaceutical quality control leverages hybridization probes to verify plasmid integrity during DNA vaccine production, ensuring purity and structural stability. Dot-blot hybridization with digoxigenin-labeled 16S rRNA probes from detects residual host cell DNA in purified plasmid preparations at levels as low as 10 pg, meeting regulatory limits for contaminants that could compromise vaccine safety. Microarray-based hybridization screens for genetic mutations in plasmid-derived vaccine constructs, such as chimeric flavivirus strains, by comparing probe binding patterns across serial propagation passages. This identifies point mutations accumulating up to 85-91% frequency, allowing assessment of strain stability and fitness without full sequencing. Probe-based biosensors offer real-time detection of environmental toxins, integrating hybridization events with electrochemical or optical readouts for on-site monitoring. Disposable DNA electrochemical biosensors immobilize oligonucleotides or calf thymus DNA on electrodes, where toxin binding disrupts hybridization or alters guanine oxidation signals, achieving sensitivities of 0.2 mg/L for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and 10 mg/L for aflatoxin B1 in river water. These devices provide rapid, field-deployable screening for genotoxic pollutants, aiding compliance with environmental regulations.

Associated Techniques

Blotting and Hybridization Methods

Southern blotting is a foundational technique for detecting specific DNA sequences within complex genomic samples. The process begins with the digestion of DNA using restriction enzymes to generate fragments, which are then separated by size via . These fragments are subsequently transferred from the gel to a nitrocellulose or membrane through or electroblotting, a step known as blotting that immobilizes the DNA for subsequent analysis. Hybridization follows, where a labeled probe complementary to the target sequence binds specifically to the immobilized DNA, allowing visualization of bands corresponding to the target locus. This method, originally developed by in 1975, has been widely applied in by identifying restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs) that reveal genetic variations and chromosomal rearrangements. Northern blotting serves as an RNA-specific adaptation of Southern blotting, enabling the analysis of through transcript detection. RNA samples are first isolated and separated by size using denaturing , typically in the presence of to prevent secondary structure formation. The RNA is then transferred to a membrane and fixed, often by UV cross-linking, before hybridization with a labeled probe that anneals to specific mRNA sequences. This technique, introduced by Alwine, Kemp, and Stark in 1977, quantifies transcript abundance and size, providing insights into RNA processing, , and expression levels across tissues or conditions. Dot and slot blotting offer simplified alternatives for rapid qualitative or semi-quantitative screening of nucleic acids without prior size separation. In these methods, denatured DNA or RNA samples are directly applied to a in discrete spots (dot blot) or linear slots (slot blot) using a vacuum manifold, which ensures even distribution and immobilization. with a labeled probe then detects the presence or relative abundance of target sequences, making these techniques ideal for high-throughput preliminary assessments, such as verifying plasmid inserts or monitoring in multiple samples. The detection workflow in blotting methods commences after probe hybridization, involving stringent washing steps to remove unbound or non-specifically bound probe and minimize background noise. Washes typically employ solutions of with , starting with low-stringency conditions (e.g., 2× SSC/0.1% SDS at ) and progressing to high-stringency ones (e.g., 0.1× SSC/0.1% SDS at 65°C) to ensure specificity. Signal development then depends on the probe label: radioactive probes are detected via autoradiography or phosphorimaging, while non-radioactive labels (e.g., digoxigenin or ) enable chemiluminescent or colorimetric detection through enzyme-linked substrates. Probes for blotting are labeled using methods such as radioisotopic incorporation or enzymatic conjugation, as detailed in probe preparation techniques.

In Situ and Microarray Techniques

Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) involves the use of fluorescently labeled probes that bind specifically to or sequences within intact cells or tissues, preserving the spatial architecture of the sample. This technique enables direct visualization of target sequences under a , typically after denaturing the cellular DNA in fixed cells or tissue sections. Developed in the early 1980s as an advancement over radioactive , FISH has become a cornerstone for cytogenetic analysis. In karyotyping applications, FISH probes target specific chromosomal regions to detect structural abnormalities such as deletions, duplications, translocations, or in spreads or nuclei, aiding in the of genetic disorders like or cancer-related chromosomal rearrangements. For instance, locus-specific probes can identify gene amplifications, such as HER2 in , providing critical prognostic information. In microbial identification, FISH employs 16S rRNA-targeted probes to detect and localize or fungi in clinical samples, environmental specimens, or biofilms without cultivation. This is particularly useful in infectious disease diagnostics, such as identifying pathogens in tissue biopsies from or periodontitis. DNA microarrays utilize high-density arrays of immobilized hybridization probes on solid substrates, such as glass slides, to enable simultaneous analysis of thousands to millions of nucleic acid sequences through target hybridization. In genome-wide applications, labeled sample DNA or RNA hybridizes to the probes, and the resulting signal intensities reveal gene expression levels, polymorphisms, or copy number variations across the entire genome. The Affymetrix GeneChip system, introduced in the mid-1990s, exemplifies this approach with photolithographically synthesized oligonucleotide probes arranged in probe sets for each gene, allowing quantitative assessment of transcripts in diverse biological contexts like disease profiling. Tissue microarrays (TMAs) extend microarray principles to pathology by coring multiple tissue specimens into a single paraffin block, which is then sectioned for parallel analysis using hybridization probes. In this format, in situ hybridization probes detect nucleic acid targets, such as mRNA or viral DNA, in preserved tumor tissues, facilitating high-throughput screening for molecular markers like oncogene expression or pathogen integration. TMAs support the study of protein-nucleic acid interactions indirectly through correlated assays, but primarily via probes for DNA/RNA in histological contexts, enabling efficient validation of biomarkers across hundreds of patient samples in cancer research. These techniques offer key advantages in visual localization, where and TMAs maintain cellular and tissue context for precise spatial mapping of targets, unlike solution-based methods. Additionally, their multiplexing capability—through spectrally distinct fluorophores or multi-probe arrays—allows simultaneous detection of multiple sequences, enhancing throughput and reducing sample requirements in both and clinical settings. Fluorescent labeling remains essential for signal generation in these methods.

PCR-Based Probe Methods

PCR-based probe methods integrate hybridization probes with the (PCR) to enable real-time detection and quantification of targets during amplification, enhancing sensitivity for low-abundance sequences. These techniques rely on fluorescently labeled probes that report target presence through changes in signals as PCR cycles progress, allowing monitoring without post-amplification processing. Unlike endpoint detection, this real-time approach facilitates quantitative analysis by correlating fluorescence accumulation with target copy number. TaqMan probes, also known as hydrolysis probes, are linear dual-labeled with a reporter at the 5' end and a quencher at the 3' end, designed to hybridize to the target sequence within the PCR amplicon. During the extension phase of PCR, the 5' nuclease activity of cleaves the probe upon encountering the hybridized probe, separating the from the quencher and generating a permanent fluorescent signal proportional to the amount of amplified product. This method was first described using fluorogenic probes in nick-translation PCR for allelic discrimination and later adapted for quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). The irreversible signal accumulation distinguishes it from reversible hybridization-based methods, enabling multiplex detection in a single reaction tube. Molecular beacons are hairpin-structured probes with a stem-loop configuration, where the loop region is complementary to the target sequence and the stem brings a fluorophore and quencher into close proximity, quenching fluorescence in the closed state. Upon hybridization to the target during PCR annealing, the probe unfolds, separating the fluorophore from the quencher and restoring fluorescence; the signal reverses if the target dissociates at higher temperatures. Introduced in 1996, these self-quenching probes excel in allele-specific PCR for single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) discrimination due to their high specificity from the stem's stabilizing effect, which requires perfect target complementarity for efficient opening. They are particularly useful in real-time PCR for monitoring amplification kinetics and detecting mismatches via melting curve analysis post-PCR. Hybridization probes, often used in systems like the LightCycler, consist of two adjacent, dual-labeled : one with a donor at its 3' end and the other with an acceptor at its 5' end, positioned to flank the target region in the amplicon. During the annealing phase of PCR, the probes hybridize to the target, enabling resonance energy transfer () between the donor and acceptor, which increases emission from the acceptor ; the signal diminishes upon dissociation at higher temperatures. This reversible mechanism, detailed in early real-time PCR monitoring protocols, supports both amplification tracking and post-PCR melt curve analysis for , as sequence variations alter probe-target duplex stability and thus melting temperatures. The method's temperature-dependent signal allows precise discrimination of closely related sequences without probe degradation. Quantification in these PCR-based probe methods relies on the cycle threshold (Ct) value, defined as the PCR cycle number at which fluorescence exceeds a predefined baseline threshold, reflecting the exponential amplification phase. The Ct inversely correlates with the initial target copy number: lower Ct values indicate higher starting amounts due to earlier detectable signal onset, enabling absolute or relative quantification via standard curves or comparative methods like the ΔΔCt approach. This principle, established in foundational real-time qPCR protocols, provides a spanning over six orders of magnitude and high , with Ct precision typically within 0.1-0.2 cycles under optimized conditions.

Limitations and Future Directions

Key Limitations

Hybridization probes face significant challenges related to specificity, particularly in complex genomes where cross-hybridization can occur between the probe and non-target sequences, leading to false positive signals that compromise result accuracy. This issue arises due to partial sequence similarities, especially in repetitive or homologous regions, making it difficult to achieve perfect target without stringent hybridization conditions that may reduce overall signal strength. In applications involving diverse microbial communities, such as ecological studies, low abundance of target sequences can exacerbate these specificity problems by amplifying the relative impact of off-target binding. Sensitivity represents another key limitation, as hybridization probes often struggle to detect rare or low-abundance targets without prior amplification steps, with detection thresholds typically requiring at least several copies of the target for reliable visualization. This constraint is particularly evident in direct hybridization assays, where from non-specific binding can mask weak signals from scarce analytes, limiting utility in scenarios like early-stage diagnostics or single-molecule detection. Sample degradation poses a substantial barrier to effective probe binding, as fragmented or chemically altered nucleic acids in fixed tissues, archived specimens, or environmentally exposed samples reduce hybridization efficiency and signal intensity. For instance, degradation preferentially affects probes targeting the 5' ends of transcripts, leading to biased or incomplete detection profiles in analyses. In degraded DNA contexts, such as forensic or paleogenomic materials, shorter probe designs may mitigate some effects, but overall binding stability remains compromised by or cross-linking artifacts. Finally, the design and production of custom hybridization probes incur high costs and limit throughput, primarily due to the need for sequence-specific optimization, synthesis, and validation to ensure minimal and maximal coverage. These expenses are amplified in projects targeting large or variable genomic regions, where extensive bioinformatics and empirical testing are required, often making high-throughput applications economically challenging for resource-limited settings.

Advances and Improvements

Recent advancements in hybridization probe technology have incorporated -Cas systems to achieve unprecedented specificity in detection. The SHERLOCK platform, introduced in 2017, leverages -Cas13a where guide RNAs (crRNAs) hybridize to target sequences, activating collateral cleavage of reporter molecules for signal amplification and detection with attomolar sensitivity. This approach enhances specificity through programmable crRNA design that discriminates single-base mismatches, enabling strain-level identification of pathogens like Zika and Dengue viruses. Integration of hybridization probes with has enabled label-free electrical detection, facilitating portable diagnostics. In one method, (PNA) probes, which hybridize to target DNA, are conjugated to bulky molecules like ; upon binding, changes in ionic current through solid-state nanopores (15-50 nm diameter) allow single-molecule resolution and mutation detection, such as the CFTRΔF508 variant. This electronic readout supports hand-held devices for point-of-care applications, offering high specificity without optical labeling. Post-2020 developments in AI-optimized probe design utilize to predict and minimize off-target hybridization effects. Tools like PaintSHOP employ ML pipelines to generate (FISH) probes by evaluating sequence specificity across genomes, balancing on-target affinity with reduced non-specific binding. Similarly, TrueProbes integrates BLAST-based with thermodynamic modeling to score candidate probes, prioritizing those with low off-target probabilities and high binding affinity for quantitative , thereby improving accuracy in single-molecule detection. Multiplexing capabilities have expanded through barcoding strategies, allowing over 100 probes in a single . The MERFISH technique uses combinatorial error-robust barcodes on probes that hybridize to targets, enabling simultaneous imaging of 140+ transcripts with via sequential hybridization rounds. This approach scales to hundreds of targets by encoding unique binary patterns, enhancing throughput for transcriptomic studies while maintaining probe specificity.

References

  1. https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Probe
  2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/hybridization-probe
  3. https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/fluorescence-in-situ-hybridization-fish-327
  4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/probe/docs/techish/
  5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4808352/
  6. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1046202315301663
  7. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259000721830008X
  8. http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/fluorescence-in-situ-hybridization-fish-327
  9. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep41392
  10. https://journals.biologists.com/dev/article/152/11/dev204775/368155/One-probe-fits-all-a-highly-customizable-modular
  11. https://elifesciences.org/reviewed-preprints/108599
  12. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0740257019300620
  13. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/taqman
  14. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3044240/
  15. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7122835/
  16. https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Fluorescence-In-Situ-Hybridization
  17. https://archive.cbts.edu/Fulldisplay/62GvmJ/897468/GenomicInSituHybridization.pdf
  18. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7108148/
  19. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1326252
  20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31243970/
  21. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK26821/
  22. https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Base-Pair
  23. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2175026/
  24. https://groups.molbiosci.northwestern.edu/holmgren/Glossary/Definitions/Def-N/nucleic_acid_hybridization.html
  25. https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Southern-Blot
  26. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26043982/
  27. https://molecular-biology.coe.hawaii.edu/lessons/nucleic-acid-hybridization-expression-analysis/
  28. https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Fluorescence-In-Situ-Hybridization-FISH
  29. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi962590c
  30. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3927376/
  31. https://www.abcam.com/en-us/technical-resources/protocols/in-situ-hybridization
  32. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667237522000595
  33. https://www.nature.com/articles/5201226
  34. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/bi200904e
  35. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7105916/
  36. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2885824/
  37. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/hybridization-probes
  38. https://www.thermofisher.com/us/en/home/life-science/protein-biology/protein-biology-learning-center/protein-biology-resource-library/pierce-protein-methods/methods-labeling-nucleic-acids.html
  39. https://ijppr.humanjournals.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/7.Neelima-Mishra-Neeta-Rai-Akhlesh-Singhai.pdf
  40. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3162037/
  41. https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/24/22/4535/2385966
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7149747/
  43. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7477006/
  44. https://arep.med.harvard.edu/oligoprobes/choose_description.html
  45. https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/33/19/6114/1308045
  46. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16290040/
  47. https://www.creative-bioarray.com/support/guidelines-for-the-design-of-fish-probes.htm
  48. https://bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2164-8-373
  49. https://www.idtdna.com/page/support-and-education/decoded-plus/how-to-design-primers-and-probes-for-pcr-and-qpcr/
  50. https://patents.google.com/patent/EP3548634A1/en
  51. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35476-y
  52. https://primer3.org/
  53. https://www.idtdna.com/pages/tools/oligoanalyzer
  54. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3424584/
  55. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040403901904617
  56. https://www.trilinkbiotech.com/a-short-history-of-oligonucleotide-synthesis
  57. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acscatal.5c05189
  58. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-02261-y
  59. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0076687923002070
  60. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.oprd.4c00382
  61. https://www.idtdna.com/page/support-and-education/decoded-plus/oligo-synthesis-why-idt-leads-the-oligo-industry/
  62. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9228464/
  63. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9577401/
  64. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3446107/
  65. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5074347/
  66. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5264587/
  67. https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg2335
  68. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.278.5338.680
  69. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC92109/
  70. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-55049-2
  71. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41522-019-0090-9
  72. https://www.nature.com/articles/ng0298-155
  73. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1797121/
  74. https://biology.[arizona](/page/Arizona).edu/human_bio/problem_sets/DNA_forensics_1/01t.html
  75. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925400523011280
  76. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095656632100172X
  77. https://www.zintellect.com/Opportunity/Details/ICPD-2025-33
  78. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2019.00450
  79. https://www.nature.com/articles/jhg199025.pdf
  80. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9228562/
  81. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK234539/
  82. https://analyticalsciencejournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/elps.201000694
  83. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-9-584
  84. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10423737/
  85. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17536664/
  86. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3807524/
  87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.syapm.2012.01.004
  88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr2.2013.10.009
  89. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16472542/
  90. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3410669/
  91. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003267099000513
  92. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1195397/
  93. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34210769/
  94. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18432697/
  95. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK13348/
  96. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4287216/
  97. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC434516/
  98. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/slot-blot-hybridization
  99. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34210770/
  100. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/cell-and-developmental-biology/articles/10.3389/fcell.2016.00089/full
  101. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/11/12/1450
  102. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3902802/
  103. https://www.nature.com/articles/nm0798-844
  104. https://academic.oup.com/hmg/article/10/7/657/558542
  105. https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt0396-303
  106. https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/36/7/2395/2410411
  107. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/immunology-and-microbiology/cross-hybridization
  108. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/AEM.01685-14
  109. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/002215549904700302
  110. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7909704/
  111. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2927474/
  112. https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/10.1139/w2012-021
  113. https://ejfs.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s41935-024-00389-y
  114. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7186906/
  115. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/2041-210X.13169
  116. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aam9321
  117. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154426
  118. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1617699113
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.