Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction
View on Wikipedia
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is a laboratory technique combining reverse transcription of RNA into DNA (in this context called complementary DNA or cDNA) and amplification of specific DNA targets using polymerase chain reaction (PCR).[1] It is primarily used to measure the amount of a specific RNA. This is achieved by monitoring the amplification reaction using fluorescence, a technique called real-time PCR or quantitative PCR (qPCR). Combined RT-PCR and qPCR are routinely used for analysis of gene expression and quantification of viral RNA in research and clinical settings.
The close association between RT-PCR and qPCR has led to metonymic use of the term qPCR to mean RT-PCR. Such use may be confusing,[2] as RT-PCR can be used without qPCR, for example to enable molecular cloning, sequencing or simple detection of RNA. Conversely, qPCR may be used without RT-PCR, for example, to quantify the copy number of a specific piece of DNA.
Nomenclature
[edit]The combined RT-PCR and qPCR technique has been described as quantitative RT-PCR[3] or real-time RT-PCR[4] (sometimes even called quantitative real-time RT-PCR[5]), has been variously abbreviated as qRT-PCR,[6] RT-qPCR,[7] RRT-PCR,[8] and rRT-PCR.[9] In order to avoid confusion, the following abbreviations will be used consistently throughout this article:
| Technique | Abbreviation |
|---|---|
| Polymerase chain reaction | PCR |
| Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction | RT-PCR |
| Real-time polymerase chain reaction | qPCR |
| RT-PCR / qPCR combined technique | qRT-PCR |
Not all authors, especially earlier ones, use this convention and the reader should be cautious when following links. RT-PCR has been used to indicate both real-time PCR (qPCR) and reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR).
History
[edit]Since its introduction in 1977, Northern blot has been used extensively for RNA quantification despite its shortcomings: (a) time-consuming technique, (b) requires a large quantity of RNA for detection, and (c) quantitatively inaccurate in the low abundance of RNA content.[10][11] However, since PCR was invented by Kary Mullis in 1983, RT PCR has since displaced Northern blot as the method of choice for RNA detection and quantification.[12]
RT-PCR has risen to become the benchmark technology for the detection and/or comparison of RNA levels for several reasons: (a) it does not require post PCR processing, (b) a wide range (>107-fold) of RNA abundance can be measured, and (c) it provides insight into both qualitative and quantitative data.[5] Due to its simplicity, specificity and sensitivity, RT-PCR is used in a wide range of applications from experiments as simple as quantification of yeast cells in wine to more complex uses as diagnostic tools for detecting infectious agents such as the avian flu virus and SARS-CoV-2.[13][14][15]
Principles
[edit]In RT-PCR, the RNA template is first converted into a complementary DNA (cDNA) using a reverse transcriptase (RT). The cDNA is then used as a template for exponential amplification using PCR. The use of RT-PCR for the detection of RNA transcript has revolutionized the study of gene expression in the following important ways:
- Made it theoretically possible to detect the transcripts of practically any gene[16]
- Enabled sample amplification and eliminated the need for abundant starting material required when using northern blot analysis[17][18]
- Provided tolerance for RNA degradation as long as the RNA spanning the primer is intact[17]
One-step RT-PCR vs two-step RT-PCR
[edit]
The quantification of mRNA using RT-PCR can be achieved as either a one-step or a two-step reaction. The difference between the two approaches lies in the number of tubes used when performing the procedure. The two-step reaction requires that the reverse transcriptase reaction and PCR amplification be performed in separate tubes. The disadvantage of the two-step approach is susceptibility to contamination due to more frequent sample handling.[19] On the other hand, the entire reaction from cDNA synthesis to PCR amplification occurs in a single tube in the one-step approach. The one-step approach is thought to minimize experimental variation by containing all of the enzymatic reactions in a single environment. It eliminates the steps of pipetting cDNA product, which is labor-intensive and prone to contamination, to PCR reaction. The further use of inhibitor-tolerant thermostable DNA polymerases, polymerase enhancers with an optimized one-step RT-PCR condition, supports the reverse transcription of the RNA from unpurified or crude samples, such as whole blood and serum.[20][21] However, the starting RNA templates are prone to degradation in the one-step approach, and the use of this approach is not recommended when repeated assays from the same sample is required. Additionally, the one-step approach is reported to be less accurate compared to the two-step approach. It is also the preferred method of analysis when using DNA binding dyes such as SYBR Green since the elimination of primer-dimers can be achieved through a simple change in the melting temperature. Nevertheless, the one-step approach is a relatively convenient solution for the rapid detection of target RNA directly in biosensing.[citation needed]
End-point RT-PCR vs real-time RT-PCR
[edit]Quantification of RT-PCR products can largely be divided into two categories: end-point and real-time.[22] The use of end-point RT-PCR is preferred for measuring gene expression changes in small number of samples, but the real-time RT-PCR has become the gold standard method for validating quantitative results obtained from array analyses or gene expression changes on a global scale.[23]
End-point RT-PCR
[edit]The measurement approaches of end-point RT-PCR requires the detection of gene expression levels by the use of fluorescent dyes like ethidium bromide,[24][25] P32 labeling of PCR products using phosphorimager,[26] or by scintillation counting.[18] End-point RT-PCR is commonly achieved using three different methods: relative, competitive and comparative.[27][28]
- Relative RT-PCR
- Relative quantifications of RT-PCR involves the co-amplification of an internal control simultaneously with the gene of interest. The internal control is used to normalize the samples. Once normalized, a direct comparison of relative transcript abundances across multiple samples of mRNA can be made. One precaution to note is that the internal control must be chosen so that it is not affected by the experimental treatment. The expression level should be constant across all samples and with the mRNA of interest for the results to be accurate and meaningful. Because the quantification of the results are analyzed by comparing the linear range of the target and control amplification, it is crucial to take into consideration the starting target molecules concentration and their amplification rate prior to starting the analysis. The results of the analysis are expressed as the ratios of gene signal to internal control signal, which the values can then be used for the comparison between the samples in the estimation of relative target RNA expression.[25][28][29]
- Competitive RT-PCR
- Competitive RT-PCR technique is used for absolute quantification. It involves the use of a synthetic “competitor” RNA that can be distinguished from the target RNA by a small difference in size or sequence. It is important for the design of the synthetic RNA be identical in sequence but slightly shorter than the target RNA for accurate results. Once designed and synthesized, a known amount of the competitor RNA is added to experimental samples and is co-amplified with the target using RT-PCR. Then, a concentration curve of the competitor RNA is produced and it is used to compare the RT-PCR signals produced from the endogenous transcripts to determine the amount of target present in the sample.[28][30]
- Comparative RT-PCR
- Comparative RT-PCR is similar to the competitive RT-PCR in that the target RNA competes for amplification reagents within a single reaction with an internal standard of unrelated sequence. Once the reaction is complete, the results are compared to an external standard curve to determine the target RNA concentration. In comparison to the relative and competitive quantification methods, comparative RT-PCR is considered to be the more convenient method to use since it does not require the investigator to perform a pilot experiment; in relative RT-PCR, the exponential amplification range of the mRNA must be predetermined and in competitive RT-PCR, a synthetic competitor RNA must be synthesized.[28][31][32][33][34]
Real-time RT-PCR
[edit]The emergence of novel fluorescent DNA labeling techniques in the past few years has enabled the analysis and detection of PCR products in real-time and has consequently led to the widespread adoption of real-time RT-PCR for the analysis of gene expression.[35] Not only is real-time RT-PCR now the method of choice for quantification of gene expression, it is also the preferred method of obtaining results from array analyses and gene expressions on a global scale.[36] Currently, there are four different fluorescent DNA probes available for the real-time RT-PCR detection of PCR products: SYBR Green, TaqMan, molecular beacons, and scorpion probes. All of these probes allow the detection of PCR products by generating a fluorescent signal. While the SYBR Green dye emits its fluorescent signal simply by binding to the double-stranded DNA in solution, the TaqMan probes', molecular beacons' and scorpions' generation of fluorescence depend on Förster Resonance Energy Transfer (FRET) coupling of the dye molecule and a quencher moiety to the oligonucleotide substrates.[37]
- SYBR Green
- When the SYBR Green binds to the double-stranded DNA of the PCR products, it will emit light upon excitation. The intensity of the fluorescence increases as the PCR products accumulate. This technique is easy to use since designing of probes is not necessary given lack of specificity of its binding. However, since the dye does not discriminate the double-stranded DNA from the PCR products and those from the primer-dimers, overestimation of the target concentration is a common problem. Where accurate quantification is an absolute necessity, further assay for the validation of results must be performed. Nevertheless, among the real-time RT-PCR product detection methods, SYBR Green is the most economical and easiest to use.[22][23]

- TaqMan probes
- TaqMan probes are oligonucleotides that have a fluorescent probe attached to the 5' end and a quencher to the 3' end. During PCR amplification, these probes will hybridize to the target sequences located in the amplicon and as polymerase replicates the template with TaqMan bound, it also cleaves the fluorescent probe due to polymerase 5'- nuclease activity. Because the close proximity between the quench molecule and the fluorescent probe normally prevents fluorescence from being detected through FRET, the decoupling results in the increase of intensity of fluorescence proportional to the number of the probe cleavage cycles. Although well-designed TaqMan probes produce accurate real-time RT-PCR results, it is expensive and time-consuming to synthesize when separate probes must be made for each mRNA target analyzed.[22][16][38] Additionally, these probes are light sensitive and must be carefully frozen as aliquots to prevent degradation.
- Molecular beacon probes
- Similar to the TaqMan probes, molecular beacons also make use of FRET detection with fluorescent probes attached to the 5' end and a quencher attached to the 3' end of an oligonucleotide substrate. However, whereas the TaqMan fluorescent probes are cleaved during amplification, molecular beacon probes remain intact and rebind to a new target during each reaction cycle. When free in solution, the close proximity of the fluorescent probe and the quencher molecule prevents fluorescence through FRET. However, when molecular beacon probes hybridize to a target, the fluorescent dye and the quencher are separated resulting in the emittance of light upon excitation. As is with the TaqMan probes, molecular beacons are expensive to synthesize and require separate probes for each RNA target.[19]
- Scorpion probes
- The scorpion probes, like molecular beacons, will not be fluorescent active in an unhybridized state, again, due to the fluorescent probe on the 5' end being quenched by the moiety on the 3' end of an oligonucleotide. With Scorpions, however, the 3' end also contains sequence that is complementary to the extension product of the primer on the 5' end. When the Scorpion extension binds to its complement on the amplicon, the Scorpion structure opens, prevents FRET, and enables the fluorescent signal to be measured.[39]
- Multiplex probes
- TaqMan probes, molecular beacons, and scorpions allow the concurrent measurement of PCR products in a single tube. This is possible because each of the different fluorescent dyes can be associated with a specific emission spectra. Not only does the use of multiplex probes save time and effort without compromising test utility, its application in wide areas of research such as gene deletion analysis, mutation and polymorphism analysis, quantitative analysis, and RNA detection, make it an invaluable technique for laboratories of many discipline.[39][40][41]
Two strategies are commonly employed to quantify the results obtained by real-time RT-PCR; the standard curve method and the comparative threshold method.[42]
Application
[edit]The exponential amplification via reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction provides for a highly sensitive technique in which a very low copy number of RNA molecules can be detected. RT-PCR is widely used in the diagnosis of genetic diseases and, semiquantitatively, in the determination of the abundance of specific different RNA molecules within a cell or tissue as a measure of gene expression.
Research methods
[edit]RT-PCR is commonly used in research methods to measure gene expression. For example, Lin et al. used qRT-PCR to measure expression of Gal genes in yeast cells. First, Lin et al. engineered a mutation of a protein suspected to participate in the regulation of Gal genes. This mutation was hypothesized to selectively abolish Gal expression. To confirm this, gene expression levels of yeast cells containing this mutation were analyzed using qRT-PCR. The researchers were able to conclusively determine that the mutation of this regulatory protein reduced Gal expression.[43] Northern blot analysis is used to study the RNA's gene expression further.
Gene insertion
[edit]RT-PCR can also be very useful in the insertion of eukaryotic genes into prokaryotes. Because most eukaryotic genes contain introns, which are present in the genome but not in the mature mRNA, the cDNA generated from a RT-PCR reaction is the exact (without regard to the error-prone nature of reverse transcriptases) DNA sequence that would be directly translated into protein after transcription. When these genes are expressed in prokaryotic cells for the sake of protein production or purification, the RNA produced directly from transcription need not undergo splicing as the transcript contains only exons. (Prokaryotes, such as E. coli, lack the mRNA splicing mechanism of eukaryotes).
Genetic disease diagnosis
[edit]RT-PCR can be used to diagnose genetic disease such as Lesch–Nyhan syndrome. This genetic disease is caused by a malfunction in the HPRT1 gene, which clinically leads to the fatal uric acid urinary stone and symptoms similar to gout.[6][clarification needed] Analyzing a pregnant mother and a fetus for mRNA expression levels of HPRT1 will reveal if the mother is a carrier and if the fetus will likely to develop Lesch–Nyhan syndrome.[44]
Cancer detection
[edit]Scientists are working on ways to use RT-PCR in cancer detection to help improve prognosis, and monitor response to therapy. Circulating tumor cells produce unique mRNA transcripts depending on the type of cancer. The goal is to determine which mRNA transcripts serve as the best biomarkers for a particular cancer cell type and then analyze its expression levels with RT-PCR.[45]
RT-PCR is commonly used in studying the genomes of viruses whose genomes are composed of RNA, such as Influenzavirus A, retroviruses like HIV and SARS-CoV-2.[46]
Pathogen detection
[edit]PCR tests can be used for early detection of DNA-based pathogens through the amplification of a pathogen's DNA, even before the host begins producing antibodies.[47] RT-PCR allows this process to be applied to RNA viruses.[36] RT-PCR tests are best known for their use in COVID-19 testing[48] but have also been used to diagnose diseases such as Ebola, Zika, MERS, SARS, and influenza.[36][48]
Challenges
[edit]Despite its major advantages, RT-PCR is not without drawbacks. The exponential growth of the reverse transcribed complementary DNA (cDNA) during the multiple cycles of PCR produces inaccurate end point quantification due to the difficulty in maintaining linearity.[49] In order to provide accurate detection and quantification of RNA content in a sample, qRT-PCR was developed using fluorescence-based modification to monitor the amplification products during each cycle of PCR. The extreme sensitivity of the technique can be a double-edged sword since even the slightest DNA contamination can lead to undesirable results.[50] A simple method for elimination of false positive results is to include anchors, or tags, to the 5' region of a gene specific primer.[51] Additionally, planning and design of quantification studies can be technically challenging due to the existence of numerous sources of variation including template concentration and amplification efficiency.[31] Spiking in a known quantity of RNA into a sample, adding a series of RNA dilutions generating a standard curve, and adding in a no template copy sample (no cDNA) may used as controls.
Protocol
[edit]This section contains instructions or advice. (August 2016) |
RT-PCR can be carried out by the one-step RT-PCR protocol or the two-step RT-PCR protocol.
One-step RT-PCR
[edit]One-step RT-PCR subjects mRNA targets (up to 6 kb) to reverse transcription followed by PCR amplification in a single test tube. Using intact, high-quality RNA and a sequence-specific primer will produce the best results.
Once a one-step RT-PCR kit with a mix of reverse transcriptase, Taq DNA polymerase, and a proofreading polymerase is selected and all necessary materials and equipment are obtained a reaction mix is to be prepared. The reaction mix includes dNTPs, primers, template RNA, necessary enzymes, and a buffer solution. The reaction mix is added to a PCR tube for each reaction, followed by template RNA. The PCR tubes are then placed in a thermal cycler to begin cycling. In the first cycle, the synthesis of cDNA occurs. The second cycle is the initial denaturation wherein reverse transcriptase is inactivated. The remaining 40-50 cycles are the amplification, which includes denaturation, annealing, and elongation. When amplification is complete, the RT-PCR products can be analyzed with gel electrophoresis.[52][53]
Two-step RT-PCR
[edit]Two-step RT-PCR, as the name implies, occurs in two steps. First the reverse transcription and then the PCR. This method is more sensitive than the one-step method. Kits are also useful for two-step RT-PCR. Just as for one-step PCR, use only intact, high-quality RNA for the best results. The primer for two-step PCR does not have to be sequence-specific.
Step one
[edit]First combine template RNA, primer, dNTP mix, and nuclease-free water in a PCR tube. Then, add an RNase inhibitor and reverse transcriptase to the PCR tube. Next, place the PCR tube into a thermal cycler for one cycle wherein annealing, extending, and inactivating of reverse transcriptase occurs. Finally, proceed directly to step two which is PCR, or store product on ice until PCR can be performed.
Step two
[edit]Add master mix which contains buffer, dNTP mix, MgCl2, Taq polymerase, and nuclease-free water to each PCR tube. Then add the necessary primer to the tubes. Next, place the PCR tubes in a thermal cycler for 30 cycles of the amplification program. This includes denaturation, annealing, and elongation. The products of RT-PCR can be analyzed with gel electrophoresis.[54]
Publication guidelines
[edit]Quantitative RT-PCR assay is considered to be the gold standard for measuring the number of copies of specific cDNA targets in a sample but it is poorly standardized.[55] As a result, while there are numerous publications utilizing the technique, many provide inadequate experimental detail and use unsuitable data analysis to draw inappropriate conclusions. Due to the inherent variability in the quality of any quantitative PCR data, not only do reviewers have a difficult time evaluating these manuscripts, but the studies also become impossible to replicate.[56] Recognizing the need for the standardization of the reporting of experimental conditions, the Minimum Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments (MIQE, pronounced mykee) guidelines have been published by an international consortium of academic scientists including professors Stephen Bustin, Michael Pfaffl and Mikael Kubista. The MIQE guidelines describe the minimum information necessary for evaluating quantitative PCR experiments that should be required for publication to encourage better experimental practice and ensuring the relevance, accuracy, correct interpretation, and repeatability of quantitative PCR data.[57]
Besides reporting guidelines, the MIQE stresses the need to standardize the nomenclature associated with quantitative PCR to avoid confusion; for example, the abbreviation qPCR should be used for quantitative real-time PCR, while RT-qPCR should be used for reverse transcription-qPCR, and genes used for normalization should be referred to as reference genes instead of housekeeping genes. It also proposes that commercially derived terms like TaqMan probes should not be used, but instead referred to as hydrolysis probes. Additionally, it is proposed that the quantification cycle (Cq) be used to describe the PCR cycle used for quantification instead of the threshold cycle (Ct), crossing point (Cp), and takeoff point (TOP), which refer to the same value but were coined by different manufacturers of real-time instruments.[55]
The guideline consists of the following elements: 1) experimental design, 2) sample, 3) nucleic acid extraction, 4) reverse transcription, 5) qPCR target information, 6) oligonucleotides, 7) protocol, 8) validation, and 9) data analysis. Specific items within each element carry a label of either E (essential) or D (desirable). Those labeled E are considered critical and indispensable while those labeled D are considered peripheral yet important for best practices.[57]
Conferences and courses on RT-qPCR and the use of the MIQE guidelines are regularly arranged by Professor Michael Pfaffl at the Technical University of Munich, Professor Mikael Kubista at the Institute of Biotechnology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Professor Vladimir Benes at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) in Heidelberg, and Professor Stephen Bustin at the Anglia Ruskin University in London. Together they support training at Precision BioAnalytics at GoCo Health Innovation City in Gothenburg, Sweden, after discontinuing the courses at TATAA Biocenter after the overtake by Care Equity.
Research
[edit]In 2023, researchers developed a working prototype of an RT-LAMP lab-on-a-chip system, which provided results for SARS-CoV-2 tests within three minutes. The technology integrates microfluidic channels into printed circuit boards with, which may enable low-cost mass production.[58][59]
References
[edit]- ^ Freeman WM, Walker SJ, Vrana KE (January 1999). "Quantitative RT-PCR: pitfalls and potential". BioTechniques. 26 (1): 112–22, 124–5. doi:10.2144/99261rv01. PMID 9894600.
- ^ Mackay, Ian (2007). Real-time PCR in Microbiology: From Diagnosis to Characterization. Norfolk, England: Caister Academic Press. pp. 440. ISBN 978-1-904455-18-9.
- ^ Joyce C (2002). "Quantitative RT-PCR: A Review of Current Methodologies". RT-PCR Protocols. Methods Mol. Biol. Vol. 193. pp. 83–92. doi:10.1385/1-59259-283-X:083. ISBN 978-1-59259-283-8. PMID 12325527.
- ^ Kang XP, Jiang T, Li YQ, et al. (2010). "A duplex real-time RT-PCR assay for detecting H5N1 avian influenza virus and pandemic H1N1 influenza virus". Virol. J. 7 113. doi:10.1186/1743-422X-7-113. PMC 2892456. PMID 20515509.
- ^ a b Bustin SA, Benes V, Nolan T, Pfaffl MW (June 2005). "Quantitative real-time RT-PCR--a perspective". J. Mol. Endocrinol. 34 (3): 597–601. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.528.6638. doi:10.1677/jme.1.01755. PMID 15956331. S2CID 1754364.
- ^ Varkonyi-Gasic E, Hellens RP (2010). "qRT-PCR of Small RNAs". Plant Epigenetics. Methods in Molecular Biology. Vol. 631. pp. 109–22. doi:10.1007/978-1-60761-646-7_10. ISBN 978-1-60761-645-0. PMID 20204872.
- ^ Taylor S, Wakem M, Dijkman G, Alsarraj M, Nguyen M (April 2010). "A practical approach to RT-qPCR-Publishing data that conform to the MIQE guidelines". Methods. 50 (4): S1–5. doi:10.1016/j.ymeth.2010.01.005. PMID 20215014.
- ^ Spackman E, Senne DA, Myers TJ, et al. (September 2002). "Development of a real-time reverse transcriptase PCR assay for type A influenza virus and the avian H5 and H7 hemagglutinin subtypes". J. Clin. Microbiol. 40 (9): 3256–60. doi:10.1128/jcm.40.9.3256-3260.2002. PMC 130722. PMID 12202562.
- ^ "ACCELERATED EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION (EUA) SUMMARY COVID-19 RT-PCR TEST (LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA)". FDA. Archived from the original on March 21, 2020. Retrieved 3 April 2020.
- ^ Alwine JC, Kemp DJ, Stark GR (December 1977). "Method for detection of specific RNAs in agarose gels by transfer to diazobenzyloxymethyl-paper and hybridization with DNA probes". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 74 (12): 5350–4. Bibcode:1977PNAS...74.5350A. doi:10.1073/pnas.74.12.5350. PMC 431715. PMID 414220.
- ^ Streit S, Michalski CW, Erkan M, Kleeff J, Friess H (2009). "Northern blot analysis for detection and quantification of RNA in pancreatic cancer cells and tissues". Nat Protoc. 4 (1): 37–43. doi:10.1038/nprot.2008.216. PMID 19131955. S2CID 24980302.
- ^ Bustin SA (October 2000). "Absolute quantification of mRNA using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assays". J. Mol. Endocrinol. 25 (2): 169–93. doi:10.1677/jme.0.0250169. PMID 11013345.
- ^ Hierro N, Esteve-Zarzoso B, González A, Mas A, Guillamón JM (November 2006). "Real-time quantitative PCR (QPCR) and reverse transcription-QPCR for detection and enumeration of total yeasts in wine". Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72 (11): 7148–55. Bibcode:2006ApEnM..72.7148H. doi:10.1128/AEM.00388-06. PMC 1636171. PMID 17088381.
- ^ Slomka MJ, Pavlidis T, Coward VJ, et al. (July 2009). "Validated RealTime reverse transcriptase PCR methods for the diagnosis and pathotyping of Eurasian H7 avian influenza viruses". Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses. 3 (4): 151–64. doi:10.1111/j.1750-2659.2009.00083.x. PMC 4634683. PMID 19627372.
- ^ Mission summary: WHO Field Visit to Wuhan, China 20–21 January 2020: https://www.who.int/china/news/detail/22-01-2020-field-visit-wuhan-china-jan-2020
- ^ a b Deepak S, Kottapalli K, Rakwal R, et al. (June 2007). "Real-Time PCR: Revolutionizing Detection and Expression Analysis of Genes". Curr. Genomics. 8 (4): 234–51. doi:10.2174/138920207781386960. PMC 2430684. PMID 18645596.
- ^ a b Bustin SA (August 2002). "Quantification of mRNA using real-time reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR): trends and problems". J. Mol. Endocrinol. 29 (1): 23–39. doi:10.1677/jme.0.0290023. PMID 12200227.
- ^ a b Souazé F, Ntodou-Thomé A, Tran CY, Rostène W, Forgez P (August 1996). "Quantitative RT-PCR: limits and accuracy". BioTechniques. 21 (2): 280–5. doi:10.2144/96212rr01. PMID 8862813.
- ^ a b Wong ML, Medrano JF (July 2005). "Real-time PCR for mRNA quantitation". BioTechniques. 39 (1): 75–85. doi:10.2144/05391rv01. PMID 16060372.
- ^ Li, Lang; He, Jian-an; Wang, Wei; Xia, Yun; Song, Li; Chen, Ze-han; Zuo, Hang-zhi; Tan, Xuan-Ping; Ho, Aaron Ho-Pui; Kong, Siu-Kai; Loo, Jacky Fong-Chuen (2019-08-01). "Development of a direct reverse-transcription quantitative PCR (dirRT-qPCR) assay for clinical Zika diagnosis". International Journal of Infectious Diseases. 85: 167–174. doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2019.06.007. ISSN 1201-9712. PMID 31202908.
- ^ Bachofen, Claudia; Willoughby, Kim; Zadoks, Ruth; Burr, Paul; Mellor, Dominic; Russell, George C. (2013-06-01). "Direct RT-PCR from serum enables fast and cost-effective phylogenetic analysis of bovine viral diarrhoea virus". Journal of Virological Methods. 190 (1): 1–3. doi:10.1016/j.jviromet.2013.03.015. ISSN 0166-0934. PMID 23541784.
- ^ a b c Schmittgen TD, Zakrajsek BA, Mills AG, Gorn V, Singer MJ, Reed MW (October 2000). "Quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction to study mRNA decay: comparison of endpoint and real-time methods". Anal. Biochem. 285 (2): 194–204. doi:10.1006/abio.2000.4753. PMID 11017702. S2CID 258810.
- ^ a b Rajeevan MS, Vernon SD, Taysavang N, Unger ER (February 2001). "Validation of array-based gene expression profiles by real-time (kinetic) RT-PCR". J Mol Diagn. 3 (1): 26–31. doi:10.1016/S1525-1578(10)60646-0. PMC 1907344. PMID 11227069.
- ^ Stone-Marschat M, Carville A, Skowronek A, Laegreid WW (March 1994). "Detection of African horse sickness virus by reverse transcription-PCR". J. Clin. Microbiol. 32 (3): 697–700. doi:10.1128/JCM.32.3.697-700.1994. PMC 263109. PMID 8195381.
- ^ a b Minton AP (April 1995). "Confinement as a determinant of macromolecular structure and reactivity. II. Effects of weakly attractive interactions between confined macrosolutes and confining structures". Biophys. J. 68 (4): 1311–22. Bibcode:1995BpJ....68.1311M. doi:10.1016/S0006-3495(95)80304-8. PMC 1282026. PMID 7787020.
- ^ Hsu M, Yu EY, Sprušanský O, McEachern MJ, Lue NF (July 2012). "Functional analysis of the single Est1/Ebs1 homologue in Kluyveromyces lactis reveals roles in both telomere maintenance and rapamycin resistance". Eukaryotic Cell. 11 (7): 932–42. doi:10.1128/EC.05319-11. PMC 3416500. PMID 22544908.
- ^ Schmittgen TD, Livak KJ (2008). "Analyzing real-time PCR data by the comparative C(T) method". Nat Protoc. 3 (6): 1101–8. doi:10.1038/nprot.2008.73. PMID 18546601. S2CID 205464270.
- ^ a b c d Tang, Yi-Wei (2012-09-13), Advanced Techniques in Diagnostic Microbiology, Springer, ISBN 978-1461439691
- ^ Gause WC, Adamovicz J (June 1994). "The use of the PCR to quantitate gene expression". Genome Research. 3 (6): S123–35. doi:10.1101/gr.3.6.s123. PMID 7522722.
- ^ Tsai SJ, Wiltbank MC (November 1996). "Quantification of mRNA using competitive RT-PCR with standard-curve methodology". BioTechniques. 21 (5): 862–6. doi:10.2144/96215st04. PMID 8922627.
- ^ a b Ramakers C, Ruijter JM, Deprez RH, Moorman AF (March 2003). "Assumption-free analysis of quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) data". Neurosci. Lett. 339 (1): 62–6. doi:10.1016/S0304-3940(02)01423-4. PMID 12618301. S2CID 9459695.
- ^ Halford WP, Falco VC, Gebhardt BM, Carr DJ (January 1999). "The inherent quantitative capacity of the reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction". Anal. Biochem. 266 (2): 181–91. doi:10.1006/abio.1998.2913. PMID 9888974.
- ^ King N (2010). "The use of comparative quantitative RT-PCR to investigate the effect of cysteine incubation on GPx1 expression in freshly isolated cardiomyocytes". RT-PCR Protocols. Methods in Molecular Biology. Vol. 630. pp. 215–32. doi:10.1007/978-1-60761-629-0_14. ISBN 978-1-60761-628-3. PMID 20301000.
- ^ Chang JT, Chen IH, Liao CT, et al. (November 2002). "A reverse transcription comparative real-time PCR method for quantitative detection of angiogenic growth factors in head and neck cancer patients". Clin. Biochem. 35 (8): 591–6. doi:10.1016/S0009-9120(02)00403-4. PMID 12498992.
- ^ Lu, Rou-Jian; Zhao, Li; Huang, Bao-Ying; Ye, Fei; Wang, Wen-Ling; Tan, Wen-Jie (5 September 2021). "Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction assay panel for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and its variants". Chinese Medical Journal. 134 (17): 2048–2053. doi:10.1097/CM9.0000000000001687. PMC 8439998. PMID 34402479.
- ^ a b c Jawerth, Nicole (27 March 2020). "How is the COVID-19 Virus Detected using real time reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction?". International Atomic Energy Agency. Retrieved 16 February 2023.
- ^ Holden, M. J.; Wang, L. (2008). "Quantitative Real-Time PCR: Fluorescent Probe Options and Issues". Standardization and Quality Assurance in Fluorescence Measurements II. Springer Series on Fluorescence. Vol. 6. p. 489. doi:10.1007/4243_2008_046. ISBN 978-3-540-70570-3.
- ^ Yang DK, Kweon CH, Kim BH, et al. (December 2004). "TaqMan reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for the detection of Japanese encephalitis virus". J. Vet. Sci. 5 (4): 345–51. doi:10.4142/jvs.2004.5.4.345. PMID 15613819.
- ^ a b Sharkey FH, Banat IM, Marchant R (July 2004). "Detection and quantification of gene expression in environmental bacteriology". Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 70 (7): 3795–806. Bibcode:2004ApEnM..70.3795S. doi:10.1128/AEM.70.7.3795-3806.2004. PMC 444812. PMID 15240248.
- ^ Ratcliff RM, Chang G, Kok T, Sloots TP (July 2007). "Molecular diagnosis of medical viruses". Curr Issues Mol Biol. 9 (2): 87–102. PMID 17489437.
- ^ Elnifro EM, Ashshi AM, Cooper RJ, Klapper PE (October 2000). "Multiplex PCR: optimization and application in diagnostic virology". Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 13 (4): 559–70. doi:10.1128/cmr.13.4.559-570.2000. PMC 88949. PMID 11023957.
- ^ Bustin SA (July 2005). "Real-time, fluorescence-based quantitative PCR: a snapshot of current procedures and preferences". Expert Rev. Mol. Diagn. 5 (4): 493–8. doi:10.1586/14737159.5.4.493. PMID 16013967. S2CID 1833811.
- ^ Lin L, Chamberlain L, Zhu LJ, Green MR (February 2012). "Analysis of Gal4-directed transcription activation using Tra1 mutants selectively defective for interaction with Gal4". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109 (6): 1997–2002. Bibcode:2012PNAS..109.1997L. doi:10.1073/pnas.1116340109. PMC 3277556. PMID 22308403.
- ^ Torres RJ, Garcia MG, Puig JG (December 2012). "Carrier and prenatal diagnosis of Lesch-Nyhan disease due to a defect in HPRT gene expression regulation". Gene. 511 (2): 306–7. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2012.09.121. PMID 23046577.
- ^ Xi L, Nicastri DG, El-Hefnawy T, Hughes SJ, Luketich JD, Godfrey TE (July 2007). "Optimal markers for real-time quantitative reverse transcription PCR detection of circulating tumor cells from melanoma, breast, colon, esophageal, head and neck, and lung cancers". Clin. Chem. 53 (7): 1206–15. doi:10.1373/clinchem.2006.081828. PMID 17525108.
- ^ "Coronavirus: il viaggio dei test". Istituto Superiore di Sanità.
- ^ Medline Plus (19 September 2024). "PCR Tests". National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Archived from the original on 16 March 2025. Retrieved 21 March 2025.
- ^ a b Cleveland Clinic (21 January 2025). "PCR Test". Archived from the original on 4 March 2025. Retrieved 21 March 2025.
- ^ Shiao YH (December 2003). "A new reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction method for accurate quantification". BMC Biotechnol. 3 22. doi:10.1186/1472-6750-3-22. PMC 317330. PMID 14664723.
- ^ Gettemy JM, Ma B, Alic M, Gold MH (February 1998). "Reverse transcription-PCR analysis of the regulation of the manganese peroxidase gene family". Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 64 (2): 569–74. Bibcode:1998ApEnM..64..569G. doi:10.1128/AEM.64.2.569-574.1998. PMC 106084. PMID 9464395.
- ^ Martel, Fatima; Dirk Grundemann; Edgar Schöig (2002-03-31). "A simple method for elimination of false positive results in RT-PCR". J Biochem Mol Biol. 35 (2): 248–250. doi:10.5483/BMBRep.2002.35.2.248. PMID 12297038.
- ^ "High Transcript Tools OneStep Kit". Biotools. Archived from the original on 20 May 2013. Retrieved 12 December 2012.
- ^ Degen, Hans-Joachim; Deufel, Annette; Eisel, Doris; Grünewald-Janho, Stefanie; Keesey, Joe (2006). PCR Applications Manual (PDF) (3 ed.). Roche Diagnostics. pp. 135–137.
- ^ "RT-PCR Two-Step Protocol" (PDF). MIT. Retrieved 12 December 2012.
- ^ a b "www.microarrays.ca" (PDF).
- ^ Bustin SA (April 2010). "Why the need for qPCR publication guidelines?--The case for MIQE". Methods. 50 (4): 217–26. doi:10.1016/j.ymeth.2009.12.006. PMID 20025972.
- ^ a b Bustin SA, Benes V, Garson JA, et al. (April 2009). "The MIQE guidelines: minimum information for publication of quantitative real-time PCR experiments". Clin. Chem. 55 (4): 611–22. doi:10.1373/clinchem.2008.112797. PMID 19246619.
- ^ Papamatthaiou S, Boxall-Clasby J, Douglas EJ, Jajesniak P, Peyret H, Mercer-Chalmers J, Kumar VK, Lomonossoff GP, Reboud J, Laabei M, Cooper JM, Kasprzyk-Hordern B, Moschou D (October 2023). "LoCKAmp: lab-on-PCB technology for <3 minute virus genetic detection". Lab on a Chip. 23 (20): 4400–4412. doi:10.1039/d3lc00441d. PMC 10563828. PMID 37740394.
- ^ "LoCKAmp diagnosis device hailed as 'world's fastest Covid test'". The Engineer. 2 November 2023. Retrieved 29 October 2024.
External links
[edit]- RT-PCR protocols from Penn state University
- Database of validated PCR primer sets (website critique)
- Animation to illustrate RT-PCR procedure, from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
- The Reference in qPCR – an Academic & Industrial Information Platform
- Top 5 Government Rt Pcr Centres in Mumbai Archived 2021-07-11 at the Wayback Machine
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction
View on GrokipediaOverview and Nomenclature
Definition and Purpose
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is a laboratory technique that integrates reverse transcription of RNA into complementary DNA (cDNA) with subsequent amplification of specific cDNA sequences via polymerase chain reaction (PCR). This method allows for the sensitive detection and analysis of RNA targets by first converting the single-stranded RNA into a double-stranded DNA intermediate that can be amplified exponentially.[9] The process relies on the enzyme reverse transcriptase, derived from retroviruses, to synthesize cDNA from an RNA template, bridging the gap between RNA-based biology and DNA amplification technologies.[10] The primary purpose of RT-PCR is to facilitate the quantification and detection of RNA molecules, which is essential in molecular biology since conventional PCR targets DNA and RNA is inherently labile and difficult to amplify directly. By enabling the study of gene expression levels, viral RNA genomes, and low-copy transcripts, RT-PCR has become indispensable for research in genomics, diagnostics, and pathology, providing insights into cellular processes that were previously challenging to assess.[11] Its versatility stems from the ability to handle scarce RNA samples, amplifying signals from as few as a handful of molecules to detectable levels.[5] In a typical workflow, RNA is first extracted from cells or tissues to ensure purity and integrity, followed by reverse transcription where reverse transcriptase enzyme, along with primers and deoxynucleotide triphosphates, anneals to the RNA and synthesizes first-strand cDNA. This cDNA then serves as the template for PCR, involving cycles of denaturation (separating DNA strands at high temperature), annealing (binding of sequence-specific primers), and extension (synthesis of new strands by thermostable DNA polymerase).[12] The technique traces its origins to the 1970s discovery of reverse transcriptase by Howard Temin and David Baltimore, which laid the enzymatic foundation for RNA-to-DNA conversion, though full integration with PCR emerged in the late 1980s.[7]Terminology and Variants
The full name of the technique is reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, commonly abbreviated as RT-PCR, which specifically refers to the process of converting RNA to complementary DNA (cDNA) via reverse transcription followed by amplification using polymerase chain reaction (PCR).[3] This nomenclature emerged in the late 1980s (first described in 1987 by Veres et al.) with the initial applications of the method for detecting RNA targets, such as in oncogene studies.[3][13] However, the term RT-PCR is frequently misused or confused with "real-time PCR," which technically denotes quantitative PCR (qPCR) applied to DNA, leading to ambiguity in scientific literature; when real-time detection is combined with reverse transcription, the preferred term is quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) or RT-qPCR.[3][14] RT-PCR variants are broadly categorized by procedural format and detection strategy. Procedurally, one-step RT-PCR integrates reverse transcription and PCR amplification in a single reaction tube, simplifying the workflow but potentially limiting sensitivity for low-abundance targets.[15] In contrast, two-step RT-PCR separates these stages, first generating cDNA and then amplifying it in a subsequent PCR, which allows for greater flexibility in primer design and storage of cDNA intermediates.[15] For detection, end-point RT-PCR analyzes amplification products after all cycles are complete, typically via gel electrophoresis or other post-reaction methods, while real-time RT-PCR (or qRT-PCR) monitors product accumulation continuously during the reaction using fluorescent probes or dyes, enabling quantification without post-amplification processing.[15] Following the technique's introduction in the late 1980s, terminology evolved in the 1990s with the integration of real-time monitoring technologies (qPCR invented in 1996), leading to the adoption of qRT-PCR to distinguish quantitative applications from qualitative end-point assays; this shift addressed the need for precise gene expression analysis in research and diagnostics.[16] A common misnomer is restricting "RT-PCR" to diagnostic contexts, such as pathogen detection, whereas it encompasses a wide range of qualitative and quantitative RNA analyses across biology and medicine.[3]| Term | Full Name | Primary Target | Key Feature |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCR | Polymerase chain reaction | DNA | Amplifies DNA templates |
| RT-PCR | Reverse transcription PCR | RNA (via cDNA) | Includes RNA-to-DNA step; often end-point |
| qRT-PCR | Quantitative RT-PCR | RNA (via cDNA) | Real-time quantification of RNA levels |
Historical Development
Early Foundations
The discovery of reverse transcriptase emerged from intensive studies of RNA tumor viruses during the 1960s, particularly Howard Temin's investigations into the Rous sarcoma virus, which suggested the existence of a DNA intermediate in viral replication known as the provirus hypothesis. Temin's 1964 proposal challenged the central dogma of molecular biology by positing that RNA viruses could direct the synthesis of DNA, prompting further experiments to identify the responsible enzyme.[7] These efforts culminated in the isolation of reverse transcriptase from retroviral particles, an enzyme capable of synthesizing DNA from an RNA template. In 1970, Howard Temin and Satoshi Mizutani independently identified an RNA-dependent DNA polymerase in virions of the Rous sarcoma virus, demonstrating its ability to incorporate nucleotides into DNA using viral RNA as a template. Simultaneously, David Baltimore reported the same enzyme activity in Rauscher murine leukemia virus, confirming the enzyme's presence across retroviruses and its role in reverse transcription. This groundbreaking work, which overturned prevailing views on information flow in cells, earned Temin, Baltimore, and Renato Dulbecco the 1975 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their discoveries concerning the interaction between tumor viruses and the genetic material of the cell. Prior to the 1980s, detecting and quantifying RNA molecules posed significant challenges due to the instability of RNA and the limitations of available techniques, such as Northern blotting introduced in 1977, which required substantial RNA quantities and offered low sensitivity for low-abundance transcripts. Northern blotting, while enabling size separation and hybridization-based detection of specific RNAs, was labor-intensive, prone to degradation issues, and unsuitable for high-throughput analysis, highlighting the need for more efficient methods to study RNA expression.[17] The invention of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in 1983 by Kary Mullis at Cetus Corporation provided a revolutionary tool for amplifying specific DNA sequences exponentially through cycles of denaturation, annealing, and extension.[18] Mullis conceived the idea during a drive, envisioning a process that eliminated the need for cloning in DNA amplification, with the first practical demonstration published in 1985. This technique was patented in 1987 (US Patent 4,683,202), and Mullis received the 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for its development, which transformed molecular biology by enabling rapid, sensitive DNA analysis. Together, the elucidation of reverse transcription and PCR laid the essential groundwork for combining RNA-to-DNA conversion with amplification to address prior limitations in RNA detection.Key Milestones and Evolution
The initial demonstration of reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) occurred in 1988, when E.S. Kawasaki and colleagues developed the technique to amplify and detect rare RNA transcripts, specifically for diagnosing Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemias by targeting BCR-ABL fusion transcripts.[19] This breakthrough combined reverse transcription of RNA to cDNA with PCR amplification, enabling sensitive detection of gene expression from limited samples, a significant advancement over prior cDNA cloning methods like the Okayama-Berg vector system introduced in 1983 for mammalian expression.[20] Early refinements in the late 1980s and early 1990s focused on optimizing the method for broader gene expression analysis, with applications expanding to quantify mRNA levels in low-abundance samples, as demonstrated in studies on cytokine expression and viral detection. By the mid-1990s, RT-PCR evolved toward quantitative formats, marking a shift from qualitative detection to precise measurement of RNA levels. The introduction of TaqMan probe-based real-time RT-PCR in 1996 by C.A. Heid and colleagues allowed for real-time monitoring of amplification via fluorogenic probes, enabling accurate quantification without post-PCR processing and improving sensitivity for low-copy transcripts. Concurrently, SYBR Green I dye-based real-time detection, first applied to PCR in 1993 by R. Higuchi et al., was adapted for RT-PCR in the late 1990s, offering a cost-effective alternative for non-specific fluorescence monitoring of cDNA amplification. These innovations standardized RT-PCR for diagnostic use, particularly in clinical virology and oncology, with protocols refined for high-throughput screening by the end of the decade.[16] In the early 2000s, quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) became integral to functional genomics, often used to validate microarray data for gene expression profiling, as seen in seminal studies integrating the two technologies to analyze complex transcriptomes in cancer research. The COVID-19 pandemic from 2020 onward dramatically accelerated RT-PCR adoption and innovation, establishing it as the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 detection and spurring development of portable devices like the Biomeme Franklin system, which enabled rapid, field-deployable testing in resource-limited settings.[21] In 2025, further evolution incorporated CRISPR enhancements, such as RT-PCR-coupled CRISPR detection assays using Cas12a for signal amplification, improving specificity and speed in diagnosing fungal pathogens like Pneumocystis jirovecii and addressing limitations in traditional probe detection.[22]Scientific Principles
Reverse Transcription Mechanism
Reverse transcriptase (RT), the key enzyme in the reverse transcription step of RT-PCR, is an RNA-dependent DNA polymerase originally derived from retroviruses such as Moloney murine leukemia virus (M-MLV RT).[23] This enzyme is multifunctional, possessing both RNA-dependent DNA polymerase activity for synthesizing complementary DNA (cDNA) from an RNA template and RNase H activity for degrading the RNA strand in RNA-DNA hybrids.[24] Engineered variants of M-MLV RT, such as those with reduced RNase H activity, have been developed to improve cDNA yield by minimizing premature RNA degradation during synthesis.[23] The reverse transcription reaction requires specific components to facilitate cDNA synthesis: an RNA template, primers such as oligo(dT) for poly(A)-tailed mRNA or gene-specific primers, deoxynucleotide triphosphates (dNTPs) as building blocks, a reaction buffer, and divalent magnesium ions (Mg²⁺) as a cofactor for enzymatic activity.[25] The optimal temperature for the reaction is typically 42–50°C, which balances enzyme stability and denaturation of RNA secondary structures that could otherwise impede primer annealing and extension.[26] RNA secondary structures, such as hairpins, can reduce synthesis efficiency by hindering reverse transcriptase processivity, leading to incomplete cDNA products. The mechanism begins with the primer binding to its complementary sequence on the RNA template, forming a hybrid that reverse transcriptase recognizes.[27] The enzyme then catalyzes primer extension using dNTPs, synthesizing a first-strand cDNA and creating an RNA-DNA hybrid; this process can be represented as: [28] The RNase H domain of RT (if active) degrades the RNA strand in the RNA-DNA hybrid after first-strand synthesis. The resulting single-stranded cDNA serves directly as the template for PCR amplification, during which the second strand is synthesized in the extension phase of the first PCR cycle using the thermostable DNA polymerase, generating double-stranded DNA.[29][30] Reverse transcriptases like M-MLV RT exhibit moderate processivity, typically synthesizing cDNA strands up to several kilobases in length before dissociating, which is sufficient for most RT-PCR applications targeting transcripts under 5 kb.[31] Their fidelity is characterized by error rates of approximately 1 in 10⁴ to 10⁵ bases incorporated, primarily due to lack of proofreading activity, which introduces substitutions, insertions, or deletions during synthesis.[32]PCR Amplification Integration
In reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), the complementary DNA (cDNA) synthesized during the reverse transcription step serves as the template for subsequent PCR amplification. Specific oligonucleotide primers are designed to flank the target region of interest on the cDNA, binding to complementary sequences and defining the segment to be amplified. Thermostable DNA polymerase, typically Taq polymerase, extends these primers by incorporating deoxynucleotide triphosphates (dNTPs), synthesizing new DNA strands complementary to the template during the extension phase.[5][33] The PCR amplification in RT-PCR follows a series of thermal cycles to achieve exponential amplification of the target sequence. Each cycle consists of three main steps: denaturation at 94–98°C to separate the double-stranded cDNA into single strands, annealing at 50–65°C to allow primers to hybridize to their target sequences, and extension at 72°C where Taq polymerase synthesizes the complementary strands. These steps are repeated for 25–40 cycles, enabling the initial cDNA copies to multiply exponentially. The amplification yield can be modeled by the equation , where is the final amount of product, is the initial amount of template, is the amplification efficiency (ideally 1 for perfect doubling per cycle), and is the number of cycles; in RT-PCR, this model accounts for variability in cDNA input due to differences in reverse transcription efficiency.[34][35][36] Key components in RT-PCR amplification are tailored to enhance specificity and yield, particularly when integrating with the preceding reverse transcription. Hot-start Taq polymerase, which is inactive at lower temperatures and activated only upon initial denaturation, minimizes non-specific primer annealing and extension that can occur during reaction setup or early cycles, a common issue exacerbated by residual components from the reverse transcription phase. Additionally, carryover of inhibitors from the reverse transcription step, such as reverse transcriptase enzyme itself or potential contaminants like RNases in unpurified samples, can suppress PCR efficiency; this necessitates strategies like one-tube (single-step) formats with compatible enzymes or two-tube (separate-step) approaches to purify cDNA and mitigate inhibition.[37][38][39][40]Detection and Quantification Methods
Detection and quantification in reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) primarily involve end-point and real-time approaches, each offering distinct capabilities for analyzing amplified cDNA products. End-point detection occurs after completion of the amplification cycles and typically relies on gel electrophoresis to separate PCR products by size, followed by visualization under ultraviolet light. Agarose gel electrophoresis is the standard method, where amplified DNA fragments migrate through the gel matrix based on their length, allowing for qualitative assessment of target presence or absence through the observation of distinct bands.[5] Staining with ethidium bromide, which intercalates into double-stranded DNA and fluoresces upon UV excitation, enables this visualization, though safer alternatives like SYBR Safe are increasingly used.[41] This approach can also provide semi-quantitative estimation by comparing band intensities against standards, but it is limited by subjectivity and lacks precision for absolute quantification.[42] In contrast, real-time quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) monitors amplification progress during the reaction, enabling precise quantification without post-amplification processing. Detection relies on fluorescent reporting systems that emit signals proportional to product accumulation. Probe-based methods, such as TaqMan probes, utilize a fluorophore-labeled oligonucleotide that hybridizes to the target sequence; during extension, the Taq polymerase's 5' nuclease activity cleaves the probe, separating the fluorophore from a quencher and generating a detectable signal.[43] FRET-based probes, including hybridization probes or molecular beacons, operate via fluorescence resonance energy transfer between adjacent donor and acceptor fluorophores, where proximity quenching is relieved upon target binding and amplification, producing a cycle-specific signal.[44] Alternatively, intercalating dyes like SYBR Green bind nonspecifically to double-stranded DNA formed during each cycle, increasing fluorescence intensity as amplicons accumulate, though this requires melt curve analysis to confirm specificity by distinguishing target from nonspecific products.[45] The threshold cycle (Ct) value, defined as the cycle number at which fluorescence exceeds a baseline threshold, serves as the primary metric for quantification, reflecting initial template abundance.[15] Quantification in qRT-PCR often employs the comparative Ct method, expressed as relative expression = , where normalizes the target gene to a housekeeping gene, and further adjusts for control conditions to yield fold changes.[46] This method assumes near-100% amplification efficiency and is widely used for gene expression analysis. qRT-PCR exhibits a broad dynamic range, typically spanning 10^2 to 10^9 target copies, allowing detection from low-abundance transcripts to highly expressed genes within a single assay.[47] Multiplexing enhances throughput by incorporating multiple spectrally distinct probes in one reaction, enabling simultaneous quantification of several targets while maintaining specificity through channel separation.[48] Emerging as an advancement for absolute quantification, digital RT-PCR (dRT-PCR) partitions the RT-PCR reaction into thousands of nanoscale compartments (e.g., droplets or wells), where Poisson statistics determine the fraction of positive partitions containing amplified targets, eliminating the need for standard curves.[49] This approach achieves higher precision at low copy numbers and resists inhibitors better than qRT-PCR, with recent 2025 studies demonstrating its utility in viral load assessment for pathogens like influenza and SARS-CoV-2.[50] Overall, real-time methods like qRT-PCR and dRT-PCR offer advantages over end-point detection by enabling closed-tube analysis, which minimizes contamination risk from post-PCR handling and supports high-throughput, quantitative workflows.[15]Procedural Approaches
One-Step RT-PCR
One-step RT-PCR is a streamlined procedural approach that integrates reverse transcription (RT) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification within a single reaction tube, minimizing handling steps and enabling sequential execution without intermediate transfers.[51] In this method, all essential components—including the RT enzyme, thermostable DNA polymerase such as Taq, gene-specific primers, dNTPs, and the RNA template—are combined at the outset. The reaction typically begins with an RT phase at 42–50°C for 15–30 minutes to synthesize complementary DNA (cDNA) from the RNA, followed by an initial denaturation step at 95°C for 1–5 minutes that inactivates the RT enzyme while activating the DNA polymerase. Subsequent PCR cycling (denaturation at 94–95°C, annealing at 50–65°C, and extension at 72°C) then amplifies the target sequence, often with ramping temperatures between phases to ensure smooth transitions.[51][52] This integrated format offers several advantages, particularly for high-throughput applications and routine diagnostics. By reducing setup time and eliminating the need for separate tubes, one-step RT-PCR lowers the risk of contamination from pipetting errors or aerosol formation, while also decreasing overall costs through fewer reagents and less labor.[52][53] The use of thermostable RT enzymes, such as SuperScript IV, further enhances efficiency by allowing RT at elevated temperatures (up to 50°C or higher), which promotes seamless progression to PCR without additional optimization and supports robust performance in automated workflows.[54] Despite these benefits, one-step RT-PCR has notable limitations stemming from the unified reaction environment. Potential incompatibilities between the RT enzyme and DNA polymerase can arise, as the high PCR temperatures must fully inactivate the RT without compromising amplification efficiency, sometimes leading to suboptimal yields for certain templates.[55] Additionally, the fixed partitioning of the reaction volume results in a narrower dynamic range for quantification compared to multi-step alternatives, limiting its suitability for samples with highly variable RNA concentrations.[56] One-step RT-PCR is particularly well-suited for detecting RNA viruses featuring complex secondary structures, as thermostable RT enzymes like SuperScript IV can operate at higher temperatures to denature these structures, improving cDNA synthesis fidelity and overall sensitivity in viral diagnostics.[54][57]| Aspect | One-Step RT-PCR | Two-Step RT-PCR |
|---|---|---|
| Efficiency | 97.7–99.4% amplification efficiency | 98.0–102.6% amplification efficiency |
| Cost | Lower (fewer reagents, reduced handling) | Higher (separate reactions, more steps) |
| Setup Time | Faster (single tube) | Longer (two tubes, transfer required) |
| Contamination Risk | Lower (closed system) | Higher (open transfer step) |
Two-Step RT-PCR
Two-step RT-PCR involves a two-phase process where reverse transcription and polymerase chain reaction amplification are conducted separately to generate and utilize complementary DNA (cDNA) from RNA templates.[58] In the first step, RNA is combined with reverse transcriptase enzyme, appropriate primers, dNTPs, and buffer in a dedicated reaction tube to synthesize first-strand cDNA, often using random hexamers or oligo(dT) primers for broad coverage of the transcriptome.[52] This cDNA product is then aliquoted into a second tube containing Taq polymerase, gene-specific primers, dNTPs, buffer, and any necessary additives for the PCR amplification phase, enabling targeted DNA amplification through thermal cycling.[15] This modular approach allows for separate optimization of each reaction, such as selecting random hexamers during reverse transcription to ensure comprehensive cDNA synthesis from low-abundance or diverse RNA species.[52] Key advantages include the ability to store the resulting cDNA pool at -20°C for extended periods, facilitating archival purposes and repeated use without repeated RNA extraction.[58] It also supports multiplexing by applying multiple primer sets to aliquots from the same cDNA sample, which is particularly useful for gene expression arrays where numerous targets must be analyzed from limited RNA input, and offers higher sensitivity for detecting low-copy transcripts due to optimized conditions in each step.[15][12] Despite these benefits, two-step RT-PCR introduces drawbacks such as increased risk of contamination and pipetting errors from additional handling steps, along with a longer overall workflow compared to integrated methods like one-step RT-PCR.[58]Applications
Gene Expression Analysis
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), particularly in its quantitative form (qRT-PCR), serves as a cornerstone for measuring mRNA transcript levels to assess gene expression in cellular processes. This technique enables precise quantification of RNA abundance by first converting RNA to complementary DNA (cDNA) via reverse transcription, followed by real-time PCR amplification and detection. qRT-PCR's high sensitivity and specificity make it ideal for studying dynamic changes in gene expression during cellular differentiation, stress responses, or environmental perturbations.[59] In gene expression analysis, qRT-PCR quantifies target transcripts by monitoring fluorescence signals proportional to amplicon accumulation during PCR cycles. Normalization is essential to account for variations in RNA input, reverse transcription efficiency, and sample quality, typically achieved using stably expressed housekeeping genes such as GAPDH or ACTB. These reference genes provide a baseline for relative expression calculations, ensuring accurate comparisons across samples; for instance, GAPDH and ACTB have been validated as reliable normalizers in diverse tissues like mouse wounds or human cardiac samples.[60][59][61] A widely adopted method for relative quantification is the ΔΔCt approach, which calculates fold changes in gene expression by comparing cycle threshold (Ct) values of target genes to those of housekeeping genes between experimental and control conditions. Introduced by Livak and Schmittgen in 2001, this method assumes similar amplification efficiencies and uses the formula 2^(-ΔΔCt) to derive fold differences, facilitating straightforward interpretation of expression alterations. qRT-PCR is frequently employed to validate findings from high-throughput platforms like microarrays or RNA-seq, where it confirms differentially expressed genes with high concordance rates, often selecting a subset of candidates for targeted verification.[46][62][63][64] RT-PCR applications in gene expression profiling include examining developmental gene regulation, such as in parasite life cycles where reference genes like ACTB normalize stage-specific transcripts. In drug response studies, qRT-PCR quantifies changes in marker genes, for example, evaluating antileishmanial drug efficacy by measuring expression shifts in Leishmania donovani genes post-treatment. These approaches reveal how therapeutics modulate cellular pathways without exhaustive genomic surveys.[65][66] Advances in single-cell RT-PCR variants have enhanced the study of expression heterogeneity within populations, addressing limitations of bulk assays that average signals across cells. In the 2020s, techniques like single-cell digital RT-PCR have enabled simultaneous quantification of multiple genes in individual cells, detecting stem cell markers in cancer lines with improved resolution of subpopulations. These methods, often integrated with droplet-based systems, uncover rare transcript events driving phenotypic diversity in development or disease.[67] qRT-PCR's sensitivity allows detection of fewer than 10 RNA copies per reaction, making it suitable for low-abundance transcripts. To ensure reverse transcription efficiency, spike-in RNAs—synthetic exogenous controls added during extraction—are amplified alongside targets, verifying cDNA yield and mitigating biases from variable enzyme performance.[68][69]Pathogen and Viral Detection
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is widely employed for the detection of RNA viruses and other microbial pathogens by converting viral RNA into complementary DNA for subsequent amplification and identification. This technique targets specific genetic sequences, enabling rapid and sensitive diagnosis of infections in clinical samples such as nasopharyngeal swabs, blood, or saliva. In viral detection, RT-PCR excels at identifying pathogens like coronaviruses, retroviruses, and orthomyxoviruses, where it amplifies conserved genomic regions to confirm presence even at low concentrations.[70][71] Primers in RT-PCR assays are designed to anneal to conserved regions of viral genomes, such as the nucleocapsid (N) gene in SARS-CoV-2, ensuring broad detection across variants while minimizing escape due to mutations. One-step RT-PCR protocols, which integrate reverse transcription and amplification in a single reaction, facilitate rapid field-deployable testing, often yielding results within 30-60 minutes and supporting point-of-care applications during outbreaks. For instance, in HIV monitoring, quantitative RT-PCR measures viral RNA load in plasma to assess treatment efficacy and disease progression, with assays detecting as few as 20-50 copies per milliliter. Similarly, RT-PCR enables influenza subtyping by targeting hemagglutinin and neuraminidase genes, distinguishing subtypes like H1N1 and H3N2 for targeted antiviral therapy. Multiplex RT-PCR extends this capability to detect co-infections, such as simultaneous SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A/B, by incorporating multiple primer sets in one reaction, improving diagnostic efficiency in respiratory panels.[72][73][74][75][76] Following the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, RT-PCR emerged as the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 detection, with cycle threshold (Ct) values below 30 typically indicating positive viral loads and infectivity. Assays achieve analytical sensitivity of 100-500 viral copies per milliliter, though false negatives can arise from primer-target mismatches due to viral mutations, necessitating multi-gene targeting. By 2025, advancements in isothermal methods like reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) have enhanced pathogen detection, offering alternatives for resource-limited settings while maintaining high specificity for viruses like SARS-CoV-2 and influenza, with limits of detection comparable to traditional RT-PCR. These developments enhance surveillance and outbreak response without requiring thermal cycling equipment.[77][78][79][80][81]Diagnostic and Clinical Uses
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) plays a pivotal role in clinical diagnostics for genetic diseases by enabling the detection and quantification of RNA transcripts associated with pathogenic mutations. For instance, in cystic fibrosis, digital RT-PCR combined with whole-gene sequencing of the CFTR gene enhances diagnostic accuracy by quantifying RNA expression levels to identify subtle variations not easily detected by DNA-based methods alone.[82] Similarly, RT-PCR is essential for monitoring cancer biomarkers, such as the BCR-ABL fusion transcript in chronic myeloid leukemia, where quantitative real-time RT-PCR assesses minimal residual disease and treatment response with high sensitivity.[83] In prenatal diagnostics, RT-PCR facilitates non-invasive RNA profiling from maternal blood to detect fetal-specific transcripts, aiding in the identification of genetic abnormalities without invasive procedures.[84] RT-PCR supports companion diagnostics for targeted therapies, particularly in oncology, by confirming the presence of actionable RNA biomarkers that guide treatment selection, such as fusion genes responsive to tyrosine kinase inhibitors.[85] Liquid biopsies leveraging RT-PCR have emerged as a minimally invasive tool for analyzing circulating tumor RNA, enabling real-time monitoring of tumor dynamics and therapeutic efficacy in advanced cancers.[86] The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) in 2020 for numerous RT-PCR kits to diagnose COVID-19, demonstrating the technique's rapid deployment in clinical crises with results in hours.[87] By 2025, applications have expanded into pharmacogenomics, where RT-PCR quantifies cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzyme mRNA expression to predict drug metabolism variability and personalize dosing for conditions like NAFLD-related therapies.[88] These diagnostic uses are validated against gold standards like next-generation sequencing, achieving specificities exceeding 95% in clinical settings.[89]Challenges and Limitations
Technical and Methodological Issues
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is susceptible to technical issues arising from laboratory procedures and equipment limitations, which can compromise the accuracy and reproducibility of results. Contamination, particularly aerosol carryover from previous amplification products, remains a significant challenge, as amplicons can become airborne during pipetting or opening of reaction tubes and subsequently contaminate new reactions.[90] To mitigate this, incorporation of dUTP instead of dTTP in the reaction mix allows uracil-DNA glycosylase (UNG) to selectively degrade contaminating uracil-containing amplicons prior to the current amplification cycle, preserving native template DNA.[91][92] Sample matrices often introduce inhibitors that hinder enzymatic activity, with heme compounds in blood samples binding to DNA polymerases and reducing amplification efficiency.[93] Similarly, immunoglobulin G in blood can chelate magnesium ions essential for polymerase function, leading to incomplete reverse transcription or PCR extension.[93] These matrix effects are prevalent in clinical specimens, necessitating careful sample preparation to avoid false negatives.[94] Methodological challenges include primer dimer formation, where primers anneal to each other instead of the target, resulting in short, non-specific products that consume reagents and elevate background signals.[95] Non-specific amplification further exacerbates this by promoting off-target primer binding, often due to suboptimal annealing temperatures or primer design flaws.[96] Reverse transcription efficiency also varies widely, typically yielding 5-50% of input RNA as cDNA, influenced by RNA secondary structures, enzyme choice, and reaction conditions.[97] Older thermal cyclers exhibit inconsistencies in temperature uniformity and ramping rates, causing uneven heating across wells and leading to variable denaturation or extension phases.[98] Recent advancements in 2025 microfluidic RT-PCR platforms address these by providing precise, miniaturized thermal control, reducing inter-well variability and enhancing overall consistency.[99] Basic solutions such as pre-formulated master mixes standardize reagent addition to minimize pipetting errors and contamination risks, while no-template controls detect reagent impurities or primer issues by monitoring for unintended amplification.[100][101]Biological and Interpretive Constraints
RNA degradation poses a significant biological constraint in RT-PCR, as ribonucleases (RNases) are ubiquitous in biological samples and environments, rapidly breaking down RNA and compromising the integrity required for accurate reverse transcription and amplification.[102] This degradation is particularly pronounced in samples like blood or fixed tissues, where RNases can reduce RNA half-life to minutes, leading to incomplete cDNA synthesis and biased quantification.[103] Consequently, degraded RNA results in lower sensitivity and higher variability in detecting low-abundance transcripts, undermining the reliability of gene expression profiles.01644-4) Alternative splicing introduces interpretive ambiguity in RT-PCR by generating multiple mRNA isoforms from a single gene, which may not be distinguished by standard primers targeting common exons.[104] This isoform heterogeneity can lead to over- or underestimation of specific transcript variants, as amplification may preferentially capture dominant isoforms while masking rare ones, complicating the assessment of functional diversity.[105] In transcriptomic studies, such ambiguity necessitates isoform-specific assays to avoid conflating splicing events with true differential expression.30678-6) The cycle threshold (Ct) value in RT-PCR exhibits variability influenced by RNA quality, often assessed via the RNA Integrity Number (RIN), where lower RIN scores correlate with higher Ct values due to fragmentation reducing template availability.01644-4) Poor RNA integrity shifts Ct by several cycles, inflating apparent expression levels for shorter amplicons while diminishing signals from longer ones, thus distorting relative quantification across samples.[106] This biological variability emphasizes the need for RIN thresholds (typically >7) to ensure reproducible Ct readings reflective of true transcript abundance.[107] In low-input samples, RT-PCR quantification can overestimate target levels due to inefficiencies in reverse transcription, where limited RNA molecules amplify stochastic variations and PCR inhibition by residual reverse transcriptase enzymes.[108] Such overestimation is exacerbated in scenarios with sparse starting material, like single-cell analyses, leading to inflated fold changes that misrepresent biological dynamics.[109] Reverse transcription inherently biases toward the 3' ends of transcripts, particularly when using oligo(dT) primers that anneal to poly(A) tails, resulting in uneven cDNA coverage and underrepresentation of 5' regions.[25] This 3' bias affects quantification accuracy, as gene expression estimates may skew toward distal exons, especially in degraded or long transcripts, and requires random hexamer priming for more uniform representation.[110] In RNA-seq derived from RT-PCR, such biases propagate to downstream analyses, altering perceived transcript lengths and abundances.[111] Pseudogene amplification represents a critical interpretive constraint in RT-PCR quantification, as highly similar pseudogenes can co-amplify with target genes, leading to false positives and inflated expression values.[112] This issue is prevalent for housekeeping genes like GAPDH or ACTB, where pseudogene-derived products confound normalization and relative quantification without exon-junction or pseudogene-specific primers.[113] Strategies for pseudogene-free amplification, such as variant-specific assays, are essential to isolate genuine mRNA signals and prevent erroneous biological conclusions.[114] The variable half-life of mRNA, ranging from minutes for unstable transcripts to days for stable ones, limits RT-PCR's ability to capture a true steady-state snapshot, as rapid turnover can cause transient fluctuations not reflective of long-term expression.[115] Short half-lives (e.g., average 4.8 minutes in some systems) amplify sensitivity to sampling timing, potentially overemphasizing acute responses while underestimating basal levels in dynamic cellular contexts.[116] This temporal constraint influences interpretive accuracy in time-course studies, where half-life variations across tissues (e.g., more stable mRNAs in roots versus shoots) necessitate complementary methods like metabolic labeling for validation.[117] In clinical settings, misinterpretation of RT-PCR results raises ethical concerns, such as overreliance on Ct values for prognosis without considering biological context, potentially leading to inappropriate treatment decisions or unnecessary isolation.[118] For instance, during COVID-19 diagnostics, ambiguous viral load interpretations contributed to public health dilemmas, including false assurances of immunity or undue stigma from positive results.[119] Ethical guidelines stress clear communication of limitations to mitigate harms from such misapplications, prioritizing patient autonomy and equitable access to validated assays.[120]Protocols and Optimization
Standard Laboratory Protocols
The standard laboratory protocol for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) typically follows a two-step process to convert RNA to complementary DNA (cDNA) followed by amplification, ensuring flexibility for multiple downstream applications. This approach uses commercially available reagents and equipment, emphasizing RNase-free conditions to prevent degradation of RNA samples. All procedures must be performed in a dedicated nucleic acid-free workspace with RNase-free consumables, such as filter tips and certified RNase-free water or diethyl pyrocarbonate (DEPC)-treated water, to maintain sample integrity.[5]RNA Isolation and Quantification
RNA isolation is the initial critical step, often performed using the TRIzol reagent method for its efficiency in extracting high-quality total RNA from cells, tissues, or fluids. To begin, homogenize the sample (e.g., 10^6 cells or 50-100 mg tissue) in 1 mL TRIzol per 10^6 cells by pipetting or mechanical disruption, then incubate for 5 minutes at 15-30°C to dissociate nucleoprotein complexes. Add 0.2 mL chloroform per 1 mL TRIzol, vortex vigorously for 15 seconds, and centrifuge at 12,000 × g for 15 minutes at 4°C to separate phases; the upper aqueous phase contains the RNA. Transfer the aqueous phase to a new tube, add 0.5 mL isopropanol per 1 mL TRIzol, mix gently, and incubate at -20°C for 10-30 minutes to precipitate RNA, followed by centrifugation at 12,000 × g for 10 minutes at 4°C. Discard the supernatant, wash the pellet with 1 mL 75% ethanol per 1 mL TRIzol, centrifuge again at 7,500 × g for 5 minutes at 4°C, air-dry the pellet briefly (5-10 minutes), and resuspend in 20-50 μL RNase-free water. Treat the RNA with DNase I (1-2 U per μg RNA) at 37°C for 30 minutes, then inactivate by adding EDTA to 5 mM final concentration and heating at 65°C for 10 minutes. Store RNA at -80°C. Yields typically range from 5-30 μg total RNA depending on sample type.[121][5][122] Quantify RNA concentration and purity using a NanoDrop spectrophotometer, aiming for an A260/A280 ratio of 1.8-2.0 and A260/A230 ratio >2.0 to confirm absence of contaminants. Use 1 μg of total RNA for the subsequent reverse transcription step, adjusting volume with RNase-free water if necessary.[5]Reverse Transcription
The reverse transcription (RT) step synthesizes first-strand cDNA from isolated RNA using M-MLV reverse transcriptase, a widely adopted enzyme for its robustness and processivity. Prepare a 20 μL RT reaction mix on ice as follows:| Component | Volume | Final Amount/Concentration |
|---|---|---|
| Total RNA | Variable | 1 μg |
| Oligo(dT)12-18 primer (50 μM) or random hexamers (50 ng/μL) | 1 μL | 0.5-2.5 μM or 50 ng |
| dNTP mix (10 mM each) | 1 μL | 0.5 mM each |
| 5× First-Strand Buffer | 4 μL | 1× |
| 0.1 M DTT | 2 μL | 10 mM |
| Recombinant RNasin Ribonuclease Inhibitor (40 U/μL) | 0.5 μL | 20 U |
| M-MLV Reverse Transcriptase (200 U/μL) | 1 μL | 200 U |
| RNase-free water | To 20 μL | - |
PCR Amplification
The PCR step amplifies target cDNA sequences using a standard 25 μL reaction volume, scalable to 96-well plates in a thermal cycler with ramp rates of 1-2°C/second and temperature accuracy of ±0.5°C. Prepare the mix on ice:| Component | Volume | Final Amount/Concentration |
|---|---|---|
| 10× PCR Buffer (with 15 mM MgCl₂) | 2.5 μL | 1× (1.5 mM MgCl₂) |
| dNTP mix (10 mM each) | 0.5 μL | 0.2 mM each |
| Forward primer (10 μM) | 1.25 μL | 0.5 μM |
| Reverse primer (10 μM) | 1.25 μL | 0.5 μM |
| cDNA template | 1 μL | 50-100 ng (from 1 μg RNA) |
| Taq DNA Polymerase (5 U/μL) | 0.2 μL | 1 U |
| RNase-free water | To 25 μL | - |