$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
We tested synthetic and wild type chromosome 3 PCRTag primer pairs1 with yeast genomic DNA (gDNA) extracted from four different strains. Chromosome 3 has 186 PCRTag primer pairs that span the length of the chromosome (synIII is ~270 kb and wild type chromosome 3 is ~315 kb). To test each of the four strains with both sets of primers, we divided the multiwell plate into four quadrants, one for each type of gDNA, assigning synthetic PCRTag primers to the top half of each quadrant and wild type to the bottom half. Genomic DNA was extracted from the yeast strains, two of which encode wild type chromosome 3 (wild type, synIXR2), while the remaining two encode synthetic chromosome 3 (synIII1, synIII synIXR). qPCR master mix was dispensed into each well of a 1,536 multiwell plate using a bulk liquid dispenser, followed by gDNA and PCRTag primers using the Echo 550. Primers were arrayed identically in each quadrant of the multiwell plate for easy visual comparison. The multiwell plate was then heat sealed with optically clear seal and subjected to real time PCR analysis.
In this qPCRTag experiment we observed, for the most part, amplification as expected, whereby synthetic primers exclusively amplified synthetic DNA and vice versa (Figures 2 and 3). However, we also observed several deviations from the expected pattern, suggesting false negatives and false positives in the dataset. In this experiment, the master control was detected in 100% of wells, indicating the bulk liquid dispenser successfully dispensed mastermix into every well on the plate (data not shown). This rules out one potential source of false negatives. Additionally, some chromosome 3 PCRTags are known to fail (shown in Figures S6 and S7 of Annaluru et al.1), including at least 2 SYN and 1 WT primer pairs; thus these wells can be ignored in each quadrant. True false negatives could arise from a lack of transfer of template gDNA or primers, however in our experience, given the correct calibration of the Echo 550 as well as preparation of gDNA and primers as described, this has not been a major source of error. Overall in this experiment the false negative rate was extremely low for WT primers with WT template (~2%) although somewhat higher for SYN primers with SYN DNA (~8%).
False positives, the detection of signal in wells where SYN primers are mixed with WT gDNA (and vice versa), can arise from cross amplification or primer dimers. Indeed, primer dimers are often visible by gel electrophoresis (Figure 1B) and represent a reasonable source of error. For the application of qPCR, the examination of melt curves can be useful to determine whether different species, such as primer dimers, may be contributing to a signal. Further, performing a control experiment whereby primers are dispensed in the absence of template DNA may help identify primers with a propensity to dimerize. Cross amplification can be observed by gel electrophoresis, in particular if too many PCR cycles are performed or if the annealing temperature is too low. We have tried to minimize the number of false positives due to cross amplification by optimizing both of these parameters for the qPCRTag protocol. Finally, examining the crossing point (Cp) values for each well can help identify primers that are not suited to real time-based detection (Figure 3, e.g., Bb22, Fb22, Bb46, Fb46). Overall in this experiment the false positive rate was low for SYN primers with WT template (~5%) and higher for WT primers with SYN template (~10%).

Figure 2: Plate heat map displaying presence/absence call for a qPCRTag experiment. Four different types of genomic DNA (quadrants separated by solid white lines) were subjected to PCRTag analysis using synthetic (SYN) and wild type (WT) chromosome 3 PCRTag primers (dashed white lines to separate SYN (top) and WT (bottom) in each quadrant). WT and synIXR gDNA encode wild type chromosome 3, yielding amplification with WT PCRTag primers. synIII and synIII synIXR gDNA encode synthetic chromosome 3, yielding amplification with SYN PCRTag primers. Primers are arrayed according to their left-to-right chromosomal positioning and positioned identically in the four quadrants for comparison. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3: Plate heat map displaying crossing point (Cp) value for a qPCRTag experiment. This is the same dataset as in Figure 2 and the plate layout is therefore identical. N/A refers to ‘no amplification’. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.