Analysis of Food Samples For Presence of GMO

WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
REGIONAL OFFICE FOR EUROPE

WELTGESUNDHEITSORGANISATION
REGIONALBRO FR EUROPA

ORGANISATION MONDIALE DE LA SANTE
BUREAU REGIONAL DE L'EUROPE

TRAINING COURSE ON

THE ANALYSIS OF FOOD SAMPLES FOR
THE PRESENCE OF GENETICALLY
MODIFIED ORGANISMS

USER MANUAL

Edited by Maddalena Querci, Marco Jermini and Guy Van den Eede

This publication is also available online at:
http://mbg.jrc.ec.europa.eu/capacitybuilding/documentation.htm

ISBN: 92-79-02242-3
Catalogue number: LB-X1-06-051-EN-C
Edition 2006




TRAINING COURSE ON

THE ANALYSIS OF FOOD SAMPLES FOR
THE PRESENCE OF GENETICALLY
MODIFIED ORGANISMS

USER MANUAL


This publication is also available online at:
http://mbg.jrc.ec.europa.eu/capacitybuilding/documentation.htm

ISBN: 92-79-02242-3
Catalogue number: LB-X1-06-051-EN-C
Edition 2006

The Analysis of Food Samples for the Presence of Genetically Modified Organisms
II

LEGAL NOTICE
Neither the European Commission nor any person
acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for
the use which might be made of this publication.

A great deal of additional information on the
European Union is available on the Internet.
It can be accessed through the Europa server
http://www.europa.eu

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

ISBN-92-79-02242-3

European Communities, 2006

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged

Printed in Italy

III
EDITORS

Maddalena QUERCI
European Commission
Joint Research Centre
Institute for Health and Consumer Protection
Molecular Biology and Genomics Unit
Project Manager
E-mail: maddalena.querci@jrc.ec.europa.eu

Marco JERMINI
Repubblica e Cantone Ticino http://www.ti.ch
Dipartimento della sanit e della socialit
Divisione della salute pubblica
Laboratorio Cantonale - Bellinzona
E-mail: marco.jermini@ti.ch

Guy VAN DEN EEDE
European Commission
Joint Research Centre
Institute for Health and Consumer Protection
Molecular Biology and Genomics Unit
Head of Unit
E-mail: JRC-BGMO@ec.europa.eu

IV

V
Foreword

The Institute for Health and Consumer Protection of the Joint Research Centre of the
European Commission and the Food Safety Programme within the European Centre
for Environment and Health - Rome Division (ECR) of the World Health Organization
have jointly organised a series of training courses on The Analysis of Food Samples
for the Presence of Genetically Modified Organisms.

The Joint Research Centre gives scientific and technical support to EU policies by
collaborating with EC Directorates General and by interacting with European
Institutions, Organizations and Industries through networking with Member State
laboratories. The overall task of the WHOs ECR is to provide support in a complete
and coordinated way to both decision-makers and to European citizens in the
environmental health field. These training courses are part of collaboration between
both Institutions to promote food safety related issues in the WHO European Region,
within and beyond actual EU borders, taking into special consideration EU Accession
Countries, as well as Central and Eastern Countries with transitional economies.

The scope of the training courses is to assist staff of control laboratories to become
accustomed with molecular detection techniques, and to help them adapt their
facilities and work programmes to include analyses that comply with worldwide
regulatory acts in the field of biotechnology. The courses are intended to teach
molecular detection techniques to laboratory personnel with a good level of analytical
knowledge, but with no or little expertise in this specific domain.

The Joint Research Centre has been committed to providing training in detection and
quantification of GMOs and, besides the training courses, it offers, and has offered in
the past, individual training for specific needs. Training in this topic has been
frequently requested due to its importance according to the increasing need to
comply with the current and developing European legislative framework.

Over the years, the Molecular Biology & Genomics Unit has developed a profound
knowledge of the different aspects related to GMO detection and quantification, and

VI
has designed, adapted or validated advanced methods for their detection and
quantification.

Knowledge of these techniques has been transferred to collaborating laboratories
through publications, collaborative projects, individual training or specific courses.
Technical details have also been provided to trainees as oral presentations or brief
written outlines. Aware of the need for a permanent source of information, the
Molecular Biology & Genomics Unit staff developed this manual, which describes
some of the techniques used in our laboratory.

The following areas are covered throughout the courses;
- DNA extraction from raw and processed materials
- Screening of foodstuffs for the presence of GMOs by simple Polymerase
Chain Reaction and by nested Polymerase Chain Reaction
- Quantification of GMOs in ingredients by real-time Polymerase Chain
Reaction
- Quantification of GMOs in ingredients by the Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent
Assay

This Manual has been prepared at the Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health
and Consumer Protection (IHCP) as background information for course participants
and is intended to provide the theoretical and practical information on methodologies
and protocols currently used. The subject matter covers a wide variety of techniques
for GMOs detection, identification, characterisation, and quantification, and includes
theoretical information considered important background information for anyone
wishing to enter and work in the field of GMO detection.

It is our hope that the structure and content of this manual will help course
participants (as well as other users) in the diffusion and dissemination of the
acquired skills in the context of the different working environments according to
needs.

VII
In no way was there an attempt to compete with information available in textbooks or
journals. This manual aims to complement existing information in the specialised
literature.

To facilitate diffusion and consultation, this publication is also available online at:
http://mbg.jrc.ec.europa.eu/capacitybuilding/documentation.htm.

JRC staff members who participated in the preparation of this manual were
supervised by Maddalena Querci and are mentioned in the Table of Content
according to their contribution.

A special recognition and acknowledgment is hereby also given to all Unit personnel
who, even not individually mentioned, contributed to the successful preparation of
the manual.

Thanks are also extended to Sabrina Miglierina, Elisabeth Dilger, Manuela Zingales,
Stephen Langrell and Steven Price for their support and collaboration for the revision
of this manual.

Maddalena Querci, PhD
Course co-ordinator

June 2004

VIII
Introductory Remarks from the World Health Organization

The World Health Organization gives high priority to the safe use and application of
modern biotechnology to food production and processing. For this reason WHO has
been very active in the organization of expert consultations on the safety of foods
derived from biotechnology since early 90s. In May 2000, the 53rd World Health
Assembly adopted a resolution that WHO should support Member States to provide
scientific basis for health-related decision regarding genetically modified foods.
Additionally, the WHO Executive Board envisaged that other relevant considerations
would be explored in collaboration with other agencies.

The Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) is an intergovernmental body set up to
establish international standards on foods. Its primary objective is to protect the
health of consumers and to ensure fair practices in food trade. WHO has been one
of the parent organizations of the CAC since its establishment in 1963. Within the
framework of the Codex Alimentarius activity WHO, and its UN sister Organization
FAO, have been involved in the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Codex Task Force on
Foods Derived from Biotechnology, the Codex Committee on Food Labeling and the
Codex Committee for Methods of Analysis and Sampling.

The WHO Food Safety Programme in Europe has been collaborating with the Joint
Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission since 2000 in the organization
of training courses on detection techniques for Genetically Modified Organisms
(GMOs) in foods. The aim of these trainings is to provide analytical biotechnology
skills to food control laboratory staff and promote the use of validated and
harmonized methods for detecting GMOs in Europe and internationally.

Adequate methods for analysis and sampling are essential for the appropriate
labeling of foods to increase transparency on production processes and to facilitate
traceability thus contributing to strengthen food safety systems. To allow broader
access to these methods it has been decided that the tutorial manual used during
the JRC/WHO Joint Training Courses will be published on the web. The methods
presented in this manual are in line with those considered by the Codex Committee
for Methods of Analysis and Sampling.

IX

The WHO Food Safety Programme in Europe recognizes the importance of the
collaboration between the European Commission Joint Research Centre, a
worldwide recognized scientific institution in the field of GMOs, and will continue
promoting capacity building activities in the field of detection methods of GMOs in
foods in Europe and other Regions.

Cristina Tirado, DVM, PhD
WHO Food Safety Regional Adviser in Europe

X
TRAINING COURSE ON:
The Analysis of Food Samples for the Presence of Genetically Modified
Organisms
USER MANUAL

Table of contents

Session Title Authors

1

Overview, general introduction on
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), EU
legislation

M. Querci, G. Van den Eede,
M. Jermini

2 Manual presentation, working methods and
course introduction
M. Querci

3

Samples used during the course

M. Querci, N. Foti

4

Extraction and purification of DNA

M. Somma

5 Agarose gel electrophoresis M. Somma, M. Querci

6 The Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) M. Somma, M. Querci

7 Characteristics of Roundup Ready soybean,
MON810 maize, and Bt-176 maize
M. Querci, M. Mazzara

8

Characteristics of the qualitative PCR systems
described in the manual


9

Qualitative detection of MON810 maize, Bt-176
maize and Roundup Ready soybean by PCR

M. Querci, M. Maretti,
M. Mazzara

10

Quantitative PCR for the detection of GMOs

F. Weighardt

11 Quantitative detection of Roundup Ready
soybean by real-time PCR

N. Foti
12 Quantitative detection of Roundup Ready
soybean by ELISA
F. Eyquem

Appendix

Example of work programme

M. Querci




The Analysis of Food Samples for the Presence of
Genetically Modified Organisms

Session 1

Overview, General Introduction on
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), EU
Legislation

M. Querci, G. Van den Eede, M. Jermini

Overview, General Introduction on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), EU Legislation 2

The Analysis of Food Samples for the Presence of Genetically Modified Organisms Session 1

Table of Contents

Session 1

Overview, General Introduction on Genetically Modified Organisms
(GMOs), EU Legislation

Introduction 3

Genetic modification in plants 4
EU legislation 5
Safety and labelling of foods derived from modern biotechnology - The WHO
perspective 13

Annex 1 EU legislation governing the placing on the market of GMOs, including the
related labelling and control programmes 17


Introduction
Apart from the range of genetically modified crop lines deployed across parts of the globe
agricultural regions, all currently grown crop cultivars are the products of intensive
domestication from their original wild state through continuous selection and controlled
breeding to be more productive, pest resistant, or to produce a better or different quality of
product than previous ancestral lines. Such changes, which have been going on since the
first domestication of plants for human exploitation, involve the exchange or recombination of
desired traits, or genes, through continual crossing over time within species or between
closely related, sexually compatible species groups. In recent decades it has become
possible to produce not only crosses between plants that are cross compatible in nature, but
also between plants that are considered as naturally cross sterile. Examples of techniques
used in those cases are embryo-rescue techniques, in vitro/in vivo embryo cultivation, ovary
and ovule cultures, in vitro pollination and in vitro fertilisation. In addition, mutational changes
could be obtained, for instance, by irradiation of seeds.
There are a number of disadvantages to traditional hybridisation and selection procedures.
One major disadvantage is that breeders often wish to introduce single selected traits rather
than transferring and recombining entire genomes. Also, the selection and sorting of
genetically stable varieties is a slow process.
These drawbacks seem to be alleviated by the application of recombinant DNA and
transformation technologies. The term genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has been
introduced to describe organisms whose genetic material has been modified in a way, which
does not occur in nature under natural conditions of cross-breeding or natural recombination.
The GMO itself must be a biological unit that is able to multiply or to transmit genetic
material. Applied to crops, the term refers to plants in which a gene or genes from different
species have been stably introduced into a host genome using techniques of genetic transfer
and where in most cases such introduced genes have been shown to produce a gene
product (a protein). The process of introducing genes into unrelated species and getting
them to function is known as genetic transformation.
The analysis of notifications for experimental releases in the EU shows the following most
frequently tested traits: herbicide tolerance, male sterility/fertility restoration, Bt-derived
insect resistance, virus resistance, fungal resistance and alteration of starch biosynthesis
(for further details see http://gmoinfo.jrc.ec.europa.eu/).

Genetic modification in plants
Although there are many variations on the plant transformation theme, there are few main
methods for genetic modification in plants. The earliest of the technologies, developed in the
1980s, uses a bacterial species (Agrobacterium tumefaciens) to deliver the gene of interest
into the host plant.
Agrobacterium, a microorganism that causes plant disease, has been known since the turn
of the 20
th
century. In nature, A. tumefaciens has the exceptional ability to transfer a
particular DNA segment (T-DNA) of its tumour-inducing (Ti) plasmid into the nucleus of
infected cells where it is then stably integrated into the host genome and transcribed,
causing the crown gall disease. The T-DNA fragment is flanked by 25-bp direct repeats,
which act as a cis element signal for the transfer apparatus.
Scientists take advantage of the fact that any foreign DNA placed between these T-DNA
borders can be transferred to plant cells to develop Agrobacterium strains in which disease-
causing genes have been replaced with specifically chosen DNA.
Since this discovery, considerable progress in understanding the Agrobacterium-mediated
gene transfer process to plant cells has been achieved. However, Agrobacterium
tumefaciens naturally infects only dicotyledonous plants and many economically important
plants, including cereals (which are monocotyledonous), have remained largely inaccessible
for genetic manipulation. For these cases, alternative direct transformation methods have
been developed, such as polyethyleneglycol-mediated transfer, microinjection, protoplast,
and intact cell electroporation and gene gun (biolistic) technology.
However, Agrobacterium-mediated transformation has various advantages over direct
transformation methods. Primarily it reduces the copy number of the transgene, potentially
leading to fewer problems with transgene co-suppression and instability.
In both cases, the cells (either those infected by Agrobacterium or shot by the "biolistic" gun)
are regenerated into whole plants, which then carry the new gene, or genes, of interest.
These plants are tested, intensively reproduced, and ultimately provide the seed for a new
generation of genetically modified plant lines.

EU legislation
1,2

The use of genetically modified organisms - their release into the environment, cultivation,
importation and particularly, their utilisation as food or food ingredients - is regulated in the
European Union by a set of strict procedures. The first community legal instruments (Council
Directive 90/220/EEC and Council Directive 90/219/EEC) were produced in 1990 with the
specific scope to protect human and animal health and the environment.
At present, the principal community legal instrument, considered as the horizontal legal
frame governing biotechnology in the EU, is Directive 2001/18/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the
environment of genetically modified organisms. Directive 2001/18/EC repeals Council
Directive 90/220/EEC and strengthens previously existing rules on the release of GMOs into
the environment, inter alia introducing principles for environmental risk assessment,
mandatory post-market (environmental) monitoring, mandatory supply of information to the
public, mandatory labelling and traceability at all stages of placing on the market, and the
establishment of a molecular register.
Under Directive 2001/18/EC existing consents granted under Council Directive 90/220/EEC
must be renewed in order to avoid disparities and to take full account of the conditions of
consent of Directive 2001/18/EC. The consent (renewable) is granted for a maximum period
of ten years starting from the date on which the consent is issued.
Following the placing on the market of a GMO as or in a product, the notifier shall ensure
that post-market monitoring and reporting is carried out according to the conditions specified
in the consent.

Directive 2001/18/EC, which is implemented in each Member State by national regulations,
deals with both small-scale field trials (voluntary releases carried out for experimental
purposes, dealt with in part B of the Directive) and the marketing provisions of GMOs (dealt
with in part C). As listed in Table 1, a total of 18 GMOs have been authorised under the
former 90/220/EEC procedure (15 out of 18 concerning plants, 3 of which by Member States
consent). To date, more than twenty-five applications for the placing on the market of GMOs
have been submitted for authorisation under Directive 2001/18/EC (for updated information
and status of the dossiers please consult http://gmoinfo.jrc.ec.europa.eu/).

1
See a near complete but non-exhaustive list of European Union Regulations/Directives pertaining
GMOs in Annex 1.
2
Status on 9.06.2004

Table 1. Genetically modified plants approved for marketing in the EU under Council
Directive 90/220/EEC.

Product Line Notifier Main traits Commission Decision
No/date
Carnation Florigene Modified flower colour 20.10.98 (MS consent)
Carnation Florigene Modified vase life 20.10.98 (MS consent)
Carnation Florigene Modified flower colour 01/12.97 (MS consent)
Maize Zea mays L.
line MON 810
Monsanto Expression of the Bt
cryIA(b) gene

98/294/EC of 22 April 1998
Maize* Zea mays L.
line Bt-11
Novartis Tolerance to
glufosinate ammonium
and expression of the
Bt cryIA(b) gene

98/292/EC of 22 April 1998
Maize Zea mays L.
T25
AgrEvo Tolerance to

98/293/EC of 22 April 1998
Spring
swede
rape*
Brassica
napus L. ssp.
oleifera
AgrEvo Tolerance to

98/291/EC of 22 April 1998
Swede
rape
Brassica
napus L.
oleifera Metzg.
MS1, RF2
Plant
Genetic
Systems

Tolerance to
97/393/EC of 6 June 1997
Swede
rape
Brassica
napus L.
oleifera Metzg.
MS1, RF1
Plant
Genetic
Systems

Tolerance to
97/392/EC of 6 June 1997
Maize Zea mays L.
Line Bt-176
(Maximizer
Maize)

Ciba-
Geigy
Tolerance to
and expression of Bt
endotoxin gene
97/98/EC of 23 January 1997
Male
sterile
chicory**
Cichorium
intybus L.
Bejo-
Zaden BV
Tolerance to

96/424/EC of 20 May 1996
Soybean* Glycine max L.
(Roundup
Ready)

Monsanto Tolerance to
glyphosate
96/281/EC of 3 April 1996
Swede
rape
Brassica
napus L.
oleifera Metzg.
MS1Bn x
RF1Bn
Plant
Genetic
Systems

Tolerance to
96/158/EC of 6 February 1996
Tobacco Variety ITB
1000 OX
SEITA Tolerance to
bromoxynil
94/385/EC of 8 June 1994

*Cultivation in the EU not authorised; **Only for seed production

A sister Directive governs the contained use of genetically modified micro-organisms
(Council Directive 98/81/EC of 26 October 1998 amending Council Directive 90/219/EEC
on the contained use of genetically modified micro-organisms).

In addition to the Directives mentioned above, a series of vertical legal instruments have
been elaborated and implemented over the years, dealing more specifically with the
approval and safe use of GMOs intended for human consumption. The placing on the
market within the Community of novel foods or novel food ingredients was, until recently,
regulated by a vertical piece of legislation: Regulation (EC) No 258/97 that specifically
concerned:
- foods and food ingredients containing or consisting of genetically modified organisms within
the meaning of Directive 90/220/EEC;
- foods and food ingredients produced from, but not containing, genetically modified
organisms;
- foods and food ingredients with a new or intentionally modified primary molecular structure;
- foods and food ingredients consisting of or isolated from micro-organisms, fungi or algae;
- foods and food ingredients consisting of, or isolated from, plants and food ingredients
isolated from animals, except for foods and food ingredients obtained by traditional
propagating or breeding practices and having a history of safe food use;
- foods and food ingredients to which a production process not currently used has been
applied, where that process gives rise to significant changes in the composition or structure
of the foods or food ingredients which affect their nutritional value, metabolism or level of
undesirable substances.

The specific issue of labelling of GM food has been addressed by several legal instruments.
Labelling requirements were first mentioned in Regulation (EC) No 258/97 (Novel Foods
Regulation), but specific GM maize and soybean lines were subsequently subjected to
labelling by the introduction of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1139/98.

In fact, as two GMOs (Roundup Ready soybean and Maximizer maize) had been placed
on the market before Regulation (EC) 258/97 came into force, specific labelling requirements
for these GMOs have been dealt with a posteriori by Council Regulation (EC) No 1139/98.

In Regulation (EC) 258/97 specific labelling requirements were established in order to
ensure that the final consumer was informed of any change in the characteristic or food
property such as: composition, nutritional value or nutritional effects or intended use of the
food that rendered a novel food or food ingredient no longer equivalent to an existing food or

food ingredient. At present products form seventeen GM events have been approved and
can be legally marketed in the EU (see Table 2). One GM soy and one GM maize were
approved under Directive 90/220/EEC prior to the entering into force of the Novel Foods
Regulation. The others processed foods derived from inter alia 7 GM oilseed rape, 5 GM
maize and oil from 2 GM cottonseeds - have all been notified as substantially equivalent in
accordance with the Novel Foods Regulation and authorised via the simplified procedure.

Council Regulation (EC) 1139/98 provided a model for labelling based on the principle that a
GM food or ingredient is no longer considered to be equivalent to an existing, non-GM one, if
DNA or protein resulting from the genetic modification is detectable. Additives were excluded
from the labelling requirements until Commission Regulation (EC) 50/2000 was
introduced.

Regulation 1139/98 was then amended by the so-called threshold regulation (Commission
Regulation (EC) 49/2000 of 10 January 2000 amending Council Regulation (EC) No
1139/98) that tried to cope with the problem of unintended contamination and introduced the
concept of threshold.
This Regulation stipulated that foodstuffs shall not be subject to the additional specific
labelling requirements where material, derived from the genetically modified organisms, was
present in food ingredients in a proportion no higher than 1% of the food ingredients
considered individually.
In addition, in order to establish that the presence of this material was adventitious,
operators had to supply evidence that appropriate steps to avoid using genetically modified
organisms were taken.

Several reasons, including the controversial opinion of different users associations in relation
to GMOs, difficulty in interpretation and application of the legal instruments issued over time,
the fact that no specific EU legislation on GM feed was in place, among others, highlighted
the need for unified, updated and complete legal instruments on this issue.
Finally, in October 2003, two Regulations were published that, amending or repealing
previous legal instruments, provided a more complete and informative guidance on these
matters.


Table 2. Genetically modified (GM) foods authorised in the European Union
3

EVENT CROP APPLICANT TRAIT
POTENTIAL FOOD
USES
DATE
LEGAL
BASIS
1 GTS 40/3/2
Soybea
n
Monsanto
Insect
protection
and herbicide
tolerance
Soy foods. Soy
foods include soy
beverages, tofu, soy
oil, soy flour, lecithin.
03.04.1996
Dir.
90/220/EEC
Art. 13
2 Bt 176 Maize Ciba-Geigy
Insect
protection
and herbicide
tolerance
Maize foods. Maize
foods include
kernels, oil, maize
flour, sugar, syrup.
23.01.1997
Dir.
90/220/EEC
Art. 13
3 TOPAS 19/2
Oilseed
rape
AgrEvo
Herbicide
tolerance
24.06.1997
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
4 MS1 / RF2
Oilseed
rape
Plant
Genetic
Systems
Herbicide
tolerance
24.06.1997
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
5 MS1 / RF1
Oilseed
rape
Plant
Genetic
Systems
Herbicide
tolerance
24.06.1997
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
6 GT 73
Oilseed
rape
Monsanto
Herbicide
tolerance
Rapeseed oil.
Products made with
rapeseed oil may
include fried foods,
baked products and
snack foods.
21.11.1997
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
7 MON 810 Maize Monsanto
Insect
protection
06.02.1998
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
8 T 25 Maize AgrEvo
Herbicide
tolerance
06.02.1998
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
9 Bt 11 Maize Novartis
Insect
protection
06.02.1998
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
10 MON 809 Maize Pioneer
Insect
protection
Maize derivatives.
These may include
maize oil, maize
flour, sugar and
syrup. Products
made with maize
derivatives may
include snack foods,
baked foods, fried
foods, confectionary
and soft drinks. 23.10.1998
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
11
Falcon GS
40/90
Oilseed
rape
Hoechst /
AgrEvo
Herbicide
tolerance
08.11.1999
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
12 Liberator L62
Oilseed
rape
Hoechst /
AgrEvo
Herbicide
tolerance 08.11.1999
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
13 MS8/RF3
Oilseed
rape
Plant
Genetic
Systems
Herbicide
tolerance
Rapeseed oil.
Products made with
rapeseed oil may
baked foods and
snack foods
26.04.2000
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
14 1445 Cotton Monsanto
Herbicide
tolerance 19.12.2002
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
15 531 Cotton Monsanto
Insect
protection
Cottonseed oil.
Products made with
cottonseed oil may
baked foods and
snack foods.
19.12.2002
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
16 pRF69/pRF93
Bacillus
subtilis
F. Hoffmann
- La Roche
Riboflavin Vitamin B2 23.03.2000
Reg. (EC)
258/97 Art. 5
17 Bt11 Maize Syngenta
Insect
resistance
Sweet maize 19.05.2004
Reg. (EC)
No. 258/97
Art. 7

3
Status on June 2004. For updated info on authorised events see:
http://ec.europa.eu/food/dyna/gm_register/index_en.cfm.(accessed January 2010)

These are more specifically: Regulation (EC) 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed, and Regulation
(EC) 1830/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003
concerning the traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms and the
traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms and
amending Directive 2001/18/EC.
In Regulation (EC) 1829/2003, rules for safety assessment have been strengthened and
expanded. This Regulation introduces, for the first time, specific rules on GM feed and
enshrines labelling requirements for GM food and feed, so far only partially covered by
Council Regulation (EC) 1139/98, and Commission Regulation (EC) 49/2000.
As a main feature, this Regulation implements the one key-one door approach: one single
authorisation covers both food and feed use, therefore filling the legal vacuum for feed
products approval, whilst abandoning the simplified procedure based on the concept of
substantial equivalence.

Under Regulation (EC) 1829/2003 (in force since 18 April 2004) the applicant shall submit a
full dossier, including a detection method of the particular genetically modified event in
question. The dossier, and in particular, the environmental and food safety risk assessment
parts, will be evaluated by the European Food Safety Authority (Established by Regulation
(EC) 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002). The
detection methods provided by the applicant will be evaluated and validated by the
Community Reference Laboratory (Established by Regulation (EC) 1829/2003).
In the Regulation new de minimis thresholds for labelling are defined. The 1% threshold
specified under Commission Regulation (EC) 49/2000 for the adventitious presence of
approved GMOs has been lowered to 0.9%. In addition, a 0.5% threshold for the
adventitious presence of non-approved GMOs, has been established, as a transitional rule,
provided they have benefited from a favourable opinion from the relevant Scientific
Committee(s). The EU recognizes the consumers right for information and labelling as a tool
to make an informed choice. Since 1997 labelling to indicate the presence of GMOs as such
or in a product is mandatory. However, Regulation (EC) 1830/2003 reinforces the current
labelling rules on GM food: mandatory labelling is extended to all food and feed irrespective
of detectability, and provides a definition of traceability as the ability to trace GMOs and
products produced from GMOs at all stages of their placing on the market through their
production and distribution chains.
Methods are thus necessary, not only to detect the eventual presence of a GMO in a food
matrix but also to identify the specific GMO and to quantify the amount of GMOs in different
food and feed ingredients.

Qualitative detection methods can be used as an initial screening of food products, to
investigate whether GMO specific compounds (DNA and/or proteins) are present. Qualitative
analysis could thus be performed on products, sampled from the shelves of supermarkets,
from supplies stored in stockpiles, or from points further up the supply chain.
If the qualitative analysis provides an indication of the presence of GMOs, a subsequent
quantitative test might give a decisive answer concerning the labelling requirement.
As previously mentioned, an essential new integral component of the legislative procedure
enters the statutory framework: the Community Reference Laboratory (CRL). In the context
of Regulation (EC) 1829/2003, the JRC, assisted by the European Network of GMO
Laboratories, has been appointed as the Community Reference Laboratory for GM Food and
Feed (CRL-GMFF; http://gmo-crl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/).
The CRL-GMFF has the mandate to evaluate and validate analytical methods to ensure that
they are fit for the purpose of regulatory compliance and to provide scientific and technical
advice in case of disputes.
An integral theme of the legislation cited calls for the availability of methods of analysis that
are sound, precise and robust. This calls for research activity to help ensure a harmonised
and standardised approach and set of analytical procedures and performances across all EU
GMO enforcement and control laboratories.
The need for harmonisation and standardization of procedures and performance within
European control laboratories has already been identified by the JRC as an essential
element for the success of any piece of control legislation for some years.
Indeed, The Molecular Biology & Genomics Unit of the JRC's Institute for Health and
Consumer Protection proposed and promoted the formation of an enforcement network of
laboratories involved in GMOs related issues since 1999.
The European Network of GMO Laboratories (ENGL; http://engl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/), formally
inaugurated in December 2002, is now composed by around 100 control laboratories from all
EU Member States plus Switzerland and Norway. The chairmanship and secretariat of the
Network is under the responsibility of the Molecular Biology & Genomics Unit of the JRC's
Institute for Health and Consumer Protection.
The scope of the European Network of GMO Laboratories is to create a unique platform for
experts that are involved in the sampling, detection, identification and quantification of GMOs
in seeds, grains, food, feed and environmental samples - and where technical items can
be put forward and discussed, namely:
Method development for qualitative and quantitative analysis;
Technology transfer, training and capacity building;

Validation and proficiency studies of methods suitable either for screening of various
matrices for the presence of GMOs, or for the estimation of the GMO quantities
present;
Reference material (the responsibility for this work package lies with the JRC's
Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements);
Sampling strategies and procedures for different GM-commodities (seeds, grains,
raw material, products for final consumers or mass caterers);
Databases and bioinformatics and requirements for unique identification of GMOs
and setting up of databases that contain such molecular data.

In the framework of the network activities, training courses are to be considered as one of
the major tools to achieve the above-mentioned objectives.


Safety and labelling of foods derived from modern biotechnology -
The WHO perspective
4

The release of GMOs into the environment and the marketing of GM foods have resulted in
a public debate in many parts of the world. This debate is likely to continue, probably in the
broader context of other uses of biotechnology (e.g. in human medicine) and their
consequences for human societies. Even though the issues under debate are usually very
similar (costs and benefits, safety issues), the outcome of the debate differs from country to
country. On issues such as labelling and traceability of GM foods as a way to address
consumer concerns, there is no consensus to date. This has become apparent during
discussions within the Codex Alimentarius Commission over the past few years. The Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex; http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp) is the
joint FAO/WHO body responsible for compiling the standards, codes of practice, guidelines
and recommendations that constitute the Codex Alimentarius: the international food code.
Despite the lack of consensus on these topics, significant progress has been made on the
harmonization of views concerning risk assessment. The Codex is however about to adopt
principles on premarket risk assessment revealing a growing understanding at the
international level (see prepublication of the Principles for the risk analysis of foods derived
from modern biotechnology, CAC/GL 44-2003 at
ftp://ftp.fao.org/es/esn/food/princ_gmfoods_en.pdf)

Different GM organisms include different genes inserted in different ways. This means that
individual GM foods and their safety should be assessed on a case-by-case basis and that it
is not possible to make general statements on the safety of all GM foods. According to the
WHO, GM foods currently available on the international market have passed risk
assessments and are not likely to present risks for human health. In addition, no effects on
human health have been shown as a result of the consumption of such foods by the general
population in the countries where they have been approved. Continuous use of risk
assessments based on the Codex principles and, where appropriate, including post market
monitoring, should form the basis for evaluating the safety of GM foods.

Labelling of foods produced through biotechnology may or may not be related to food safety
per se, but it is being seen by the WHO as a tool to increase the transparency of food
production processes. Such labelling may also foster the development of traceability

4
For exhaustive information on the activity of WHO and other UN agencies on Foods derived from
Modern Biotechnologies see http://www.who.int/foodsafety/en/.

strategies, which could be seen to contribute to improving national food safety programmes
and therefore contribute indirectly to food safety in general. Thus the importance of suitable
methods of analysis and sampling is clear.

The WHO has been active in the development of principles and recommendations for the
safety and risk assessment of foods derived from biotechnology. The results developed in
the course of various expert consultations form the basis for guidelines at the national level
and are presently being incorporated into internationally recognized guidelines. The
approach based on the principle of substantial equivalence was developed for the safety
assessment of the first generation of genetically modified (GM) crops and is felt by many to
be an adequate approach. Nevertheless, the concept is subject to ongoing criticism.
Contemporary activities have to take these arguments into account and contribute to the
development of science-based adjustments and improvements.
The WHO/FAO Expert Consultation on Safety Aspects of Genetically Modified Foods of
Plant Origin held in 2000 recognised that the concept of substantial equivalence can be used
as a comparative approach focusing on the similarities and differences between the
genetically modified food and its conventional counterpart. Simultaneously, it expressed the
view that the concept of substantial equivalence is not a safety assessment in itself nor an
endpoint but just a starting point of the safety assessment
(http://www.fao.org/ag/agn/food/risk_biotech_aspects_en.stm).
The next generation of GM foods will be crops with improved nutritional value, thus crossing
the borderline to functional foods and nutraceuticals. Future food safety assessment
strategies will have to cope with the more complex metabolic changes caused by the given
genetic modification(s). Evaluations will increasingly have to consider the impact of a GM
food on the overall nutritional status taking into account the different needs in developed and
developing countries.

No specific international regulatory systems are currently in place. However, several
international organizations are involved in developing protocols for GMOs. As mentioned
above, Codex is developing principles for human health risk analysis of GM foods. The
premise of these principles dictates a pre-market assessment, performed on a case-by-case
basis and including an evaluation of both direct effects (from the inserted gene) and
unintended effects (that may arise as a consequence of the insertion of a new gene). The
principles are at an advanced stage of development but have not been adopted yet (see
prepublication of the Principles for the risk analysis of foods derived from modern
biotechnology, CAC/GL 44-2003 at ftp://ftp.fao.org/es/esn/food/princ_gmfoods_en.pdf).
These and other Codex principles under development (including Principles on Methods of

Analysis and Sampling) do not have a binding effect on national legislation, but are referred
to specifically in the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement of the World Trade Organization
(SPS Agreement), and can be used as a reference in cases of trade disputes.
Taking into account the work delivered between 1999-2003 by the Ad Hoc
Intergovernmental Codex Task Force on Foods Derived from Biotechnology
(http://www.fao.org/ag/agn/agns/biotechnology_codex_en.asp), the Codex Committee on
Food Labelling and the Codex Committee for Methods of Analysis and Sampling, the
development of generally accepted guidelines for the safety assessment of foods derived
from biotechnology, risk communication issues (e.g. labelling) and therefore the
development of appropriate methods of analysis will continue to be a focus of WHO
activities.

WHO continues therefore to convene expert consultations
(http://www.who.int/foodsafety/biotech/consult/en/) to develop principles and methodologies
for risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication associated with foods
produced through biotechnology and coordinates collaboration between developed and
developing countries in the field of detection methods.

The Food Safety Department within WHO is finalizing an evidence-based study of the
implications of modern food biotechnology on human health and development. Impetus for
the study arose from a resolution of the fifty-third World Health Assembly in May 2000 that
the WHO should strengthen its capacity to support Member States establish the scientific
basis for decisions on modern food biotechnology, and to ensure the transparency,
excellence and independence of opinions delivered.
The study (http://www.who.int/foodsafety/biotech/who_study/en/index.html) aims to
complement the efforts of other international agencies by collating already existing
information and analysing it as it pertains to the WHO mandate. To enhance transparency in
the process, WHO has collaborated with FAO and involved an array of stakeholders and
interest groups. The primary aim is to create an accessible knowledge base to assist
Member States, international standards bodies and other stakeholders to achieve
transparent and inclusive consensus on the evaluation and application of biotechnology.
Finally, WHO is seeking to establish an evidence-based foundation for a more holistic
evaluation of biotechnology in the future.
This study was looking to place the overall contribution that modern food biotechnology can
make to human health and development in context. It includes the application of modern
food biotechnology to microorganisms, plants and animals. An integrated (holistic) approach
was adopted to identify the key issues impacting directly or indirectly on human health and

development, and establish the available evidence. The main issues on which evidence was
invited:
Research and Development;
Impact on human health (food safety and environmental effects);
Food security, cost and access to the technology;
Ethical, legal and social issues;
Capacity-building initiatives.
Data were gathered through extensive literature, Internet and enquiry-based research
supported by approximately 120 responses to a questionnaire, which was circulated to a
broad range of stakeholders and experts in May 2002. The comments received from an
electronic stakeholder discussion held between January and April 2003 have also been
incorporated. The opinions of participants comprising representatives from government,
consumer, industry, research, non-government organizations (NGOs) from developed and
developing countries, who attended a stakeholder meeting on 5 and 6 June 2003 in Geneva,
were also included.

The report produced from this consultation process will be used directly by WHO in planning
its future activities with regard to the use and application of modern biotechnology in human
health and development.


Annex 1 EU legislation governing the placing on the market of
GMOs, including the related labelling and control programmes

Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the deliberate release into the
environment of genetically modified organisms.
(OJ L 117, 8.5.1990, p. 15)
Repealed by:
Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on
the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing
Council Directive 90/220/EEC.
(OJ L 106, 17.4.2001, p. 1)

Council Directive 90/219/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the contained use of genetically modified
micro-organisms.
(OJ L 117, 8.5.1990, p. 1)
Amended by:
Council Directive 98/81/EC of 26 October 1998 amending Directive 90/219/EEC on the
contained use of genetically modified micro-organisms
(OJ L 330, 5.12.1998, p. 13)

Regulation (EC) 258/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 1997
concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients.
(OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 1)

Regulation (EC) 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January
2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the
European Food Safety Authority and laying down the procedures in matter of food safety.
(OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1)

Council Regulation (EC) 1139/98 of 26 May 1998 concerning the compulsory indication of
the labelling of certain foodstuffs produced from genetically modified organisms of particulars
other than those provided for in Directive 79/112/EEC.
(OJ L 159, 3.6.1998, p. 4)

Directive 97/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 1997
amending Directive 79/112/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States
relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs.
(OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 21)

Council Directive 96/21/EC of 29 March 1996 amending Commission Directive 94/54/EC
concerning the compulsory indication on the labelling of certain foodstuffs of particulars other
than those provided for in Directive 79/112/EEC.
(OJ L 88, 5.4.1996, p. 5)

Commission Directive 94/54/EC of 18 November 1994 concerning the compulsory indication
on the labelling of certain foodstuffs of particulars other than those provided for in Council
(OJ L 300, 23.11.1994, p. 14)

Commission Regulation (EC) 49/2000 of 10 January 2000 amending Council Regulation
(EC) No 1139/98 concerning the compulsory indication on the labelling of certain foodstuffs
produced from genetically modified organisms of particulars other than those provided for in
(OJ L 006, 11.1.2000, p. 13)

Commission Regulation (EC) 50/2000 of 10 January 2000 on the labelling of foodstuffs and
food ingredients containing additives and flavourings that have been genetically modified or
have been produced from genetically modified organisms.
(OJ L 006, 11.1.2000, p. 15)

Council Directive 89/397/EEC of 14 June 1989 on the official control of foodstuffs
(OJ L 186, 30.06.1989, p. 23)

Council Directive 93/99/EEC of 29 October 1993 on the subject of additional measures
concerning the official control of foodstuffs
(OJ L 290, 24.11.1993, p. 14)

Commission Recommendation of 25 January 2002 concerning a coordinated programme for
the official control of foodstuffs for 2002. (2002/66/EC)
(OJ L 26, 30.1.2002, p. 8)


Regulation (EC) 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September
2003 on genetically modified food and feed.
(OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 1)

Regulation (EC) 1830/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September
2003 concerning the traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms and the
traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms and
amending Directive 2001/18/EC.
(OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 24)

Commission Regulation (EC) 641/2004 of 6 April 2004 on detailed rules for the
implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the
Council as regards the application for the authorisation of new genetically modified food and
feed, the notification of existing products and adventitious or technically unavoidable
presence of genetically modified material which has benefited from a favourable risk
evaluation
(OJ L 102, 7.4.2004, p. 14)

Council Directive 79/112/EEC of 18 December 1978 on the approximation of the laws of the
Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for sale to
the ultimate consumer
(OJ L 33, 8.2.1979, p. 1)

Commission Regulation (EC) 65/2004 of 14 January 2004 establishing a system for the
development and assignment of unique identifiers for genetically modified organisms
(OJ L 10, 16.1.2004, p. 6)

REGULATION (EC) No 882/2004 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE
COUNCIL of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of
compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules
(OJ L 165, 30.4.2004, p. 141)





Session 2

Manual Presentation, Working Methods and Course
Introduction

M. Querci

Manual Presentation, Working Methods and Course Introduction 2


Table of Contents

Session 2

Manual Presentation, Working Methods and Course Introduction

How to detect GMOs 3
Inherent advantages and limitations of DNA and protein-based approaches 4
General considerations and presentation of the manual 7

References 11


How to detect GMOs

As discussed previously, transgenic plants are characterised by the insertion of a
new gene (or a new set of genes) into their genomes. The new gene(s) are
translated and the new protein expressed. This gives the plant a new characteristic,
such as resistance to certain insects or tolerance to herbicides. The basis of every
type of GMO detection technology is to exploit the difference between the unmodified
variety and the transgenic plant. This can be done by detecting the new transgenic
DNA that has been inserted, or the new protein expressed, or (if the protein acts as
an enzyme), by using chemical analysis to detect the product of the enzymatic
reaction.
There are two scientific approaches generally used today for detecting genetic
modification in crops such as soybeans, corn, cotton and others. One, ELISA
(Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay), involves testing for the presence of specific
proteins by exploiting the specificity of binding between expressed antigen and target
antibody; the other, PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction), is based on the detection of
novel DNA sequences inserted into the crops genome. These methods show the
absence or presence of the GMO in the sample but can also give some indication of
quantity (percentage) in a tested sample.
The first method validated at the EU level was for a PCR-based screening method
able to detect most of the GMOs presently approved for marketing (Lipp et al., 1999).
This method, developed by Pietsch et al. (1997), is based on the detection of the
control sequences flanking the newly introduced gene, namely the 35S promoter and
the nos terminator. The validation was co-ordinated by the Food Products and
Consumer Goods Unit of the IHCP, Joint Research Centre and carried out in
collaboration with the JRC Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements
(IRMM), which was responsible for the production of appropriate Certified Reference
Materials.
As mentioned above, research efforts are also directed at the development of
protein-based methods. A highly specific method for the detection of Roundup
Ready soybean using ELISA has been validated (Lipp et al., 2000) and others have
been developed (http://mbg.jrc.ec.europa.eu/home/ict/methodsdatabase.htm).


Inherent advantages and limitations of DNA and protein-based
approaches

The DNA-based approach
Analytical methods based on PCR technology are increasingly used for the detection
of DNA sequences associated with GMOs.
PCR allows the selective amplification of specific segments of DNA occurring at low
frequency in a complex mixture of other DNA sequences. In PCR, the small
complementary DNA pieces are referred to as primers and are used in pairs. These
primers are designed to hybridise to complementary sequence recognition sites on
opposite strands of the gene of interest. Through a series of repetitive differential
thermal cycles a DNA polymerase enzyme aids the replication and exponential
amplification of the sequence between the primer pair. Finally, these amplified pieces
are subjected to standard gel electrophoresis so their presence can be detected
based on their size determination.
Numerous PCR-based methods have been developed which can detect and quantify
GMOs in agricultural food and feed crops. Moreover, the determination of genetic
identity allows for segregation and traceability (identity preservation) throughout the
supply chain of GM crops.
An essential prerequisite for GMO detection comprises knowledge of the type of
genetic modification, including the molecular make-up of the introduced gene and the
regulatory elements (promoters and terminators) flanking it. For analysis, a minimum
amount of sample material containing intact DNA comprising the target gene is
required.
PCR is a laboratory-based technique, requiring trained staff and specialised
equipment.
Some of the key characteristics of PCR diagnostics are as follows:
- It can be extremely sensitive, capable of detecting one or a few copies of a gene or
target sequence of interest within an entire organisms genetic material, or genome.
As a result of this high sensitivity, very low levels of inadvertent contamination can
result in false positives. Therefore, great care must be taken to prevent cross
contamination.
- It requires little reagent development time compared to immunological assays
(primer synthesis vs. antibody production).

- Nearly all reagents needed are commercially available and can be readily obtained
from a number of sources. However, some of these require a license for use in
commercial diagnostic applications.
- Sample analysis time requires approximately one day.
- PCR is capable of discriminating between different types of genetic modification
(also referred to as transgenic events) if properly developed. Diagnostic methods for
identifying specific transgenic events require additional development time and
validation efforts.

The protein-based approach
The protein-based test method uses antibodies specific to the protein of interest.
ELISA detects or measures the amount of protein of interest in a sample that may
contain other numerous dissimilar proteins. ELISA uses one antibody to bind the
specific protein, a second antibody to amplify the detection (optional), and an
antibody-conjugated to an enzyme whose product generates a colour reaction that
can be easily visualised and quantified based on comparison of a standard curve of
the protein of interest.
Trained personnel and specialised equipment are also required for proper execution
of the test.
Key characteristics of ELISA evaluations include:
- Less sensitive than PCR, therefore, less susceptible than PCR to false positives
caused by minor levels of contamination.
- High up front costs for assay development and generation of antibodies and protein
standards.
- Low per sample cost once reagents are developed.
- It cannot discriminate between different expression patterns and modes among
different transgenic events that express similar protein characteristics.
- Protein-based methods require significant lead-time for reagents and method
development.
- Protein-based testing provides a practical and effective testing process when a
detectable protein is produced. However, genetically modified products might be
produced only during certain developmental stages or in certain plant parts and such
GMOs are therefore unlikely to be readily detected with ELISA. In addition, industrial
processing easily denatures proteins, which makes it problematical to use ELISA
methods for processed food fractions.


Considering these facts, it should be clear that both ELISA and PCR should be
regarded as complementary rather than exclusive to each other.

Table 1. Summarised comparison of the ELISA and PCR methods

Method Tests
for
Duration Ease of use Results
ELISA Protein 2 - 8 hours Moderate; requires
familiarity with laboratory
practices; tests are crop
and variety specific
Confirms specific genetic
modification and allows
quantification.
PCR DNA 1 - 3 days Difficult; requires
specialised equipment
and training
Very sensitive; prone to false
positives; confirms presence
of GM DNA and allows
quantification.


General considerations and presentation of the manual
Method validation is critical to both laboratories and control authorities. Ideally, each
method should be confirmed for performance verification by a limited number of
skilled laboratories to provide reproducible, sensitive and specific results. The Joint
Research Centre of the European Commission was first to validate the ELISA and
PCR methods for raw materials consisting of Roundup Ready soybean and a PCR
method for Maximizer maize (Bt-176) and to validate a PCR method for both
Roundup Ready soybean and Maximizer maize (Bt-176) in processed food
fractions (Lipp et al., 1999, 2000 and 2001). Since then, various other methods for
both qualitative and quantitative analysis have been developed and validated. For
updated information on validated methods for GMO detection and quantification,
please see http://mbg.jrc.ec.europa.eu/home/ict/methodsdatabase.htm. Sample
preparation for both DNA-based and protein-based methods is critical for detection
and/or quantification. It is important to know the limitations of each procedure
depending on the question (e.g. qualitative or quantitative) of interest. Both the
sample size and sampling procedures dramatically impact on the conclusions that
may be drawn from any of these testing methods.
The availability of suitable Certified Reference Materials is a fundamental
requirement for each detection method. The samples used during the course are
Certified Reference Materials produced at the JRC IRMM (Trapmann et al., 2002 and
2001). The characteristics and corresponding certificates are presented in Session 3.
Another critical step, which will not be performed during the course, but is important
to mention, is sample homogenisation.
Figure 1 summarises the different steps performed during the course. Optimised
DNA extraction is fundamental to insure the presence and quality of extracted, PCR
amplifiable, DNA. This aspect is particularly important as most food commodities on
the market made from soybeans or maize are highly processed. It is well known that
DNA may degrade considerably during food processing, particularly by thermal
treatment in the presence of water. Thus, the amount of DNA fragments that are still
sufficiently long enough, and still containing the intact target of interest to allow the
detection of the presence of GMOs in processed food, might decrease the more the
food is processed. In addition, a proper suitable DNA extraction method should
insure the removal of inhibitory substances present in the sample. This topic will be
covered in Session 4. Several methods for DNA extraction have been developed and
many commercial companies have produced specialised ready to use kits.

Performance and validity of the different available protocols will be discussed during
the course. However, in order to avoid direct implications with commercial
companies, it was decided to perform DNA extraction using the so-called CTAB
method, a validated and versatile protocol that has demonstrated its suitability for a
variety of different matrices.
After DNA extraction, the samples (as well as PCR products) are analysed by
agarose gel electrophoresis (Session 5).
The principles, advantages and drawbacks of the Polymerase Chain Reaction will
be presented in Session 6.
As mentioned above, the efficient utilisation of modern techniques for GMO detection
depends on the availability of accurate information. GMO detection requires at least a
partial knowledge of the target gene sequence and type of genetic modification. The
specific characteristics of transgenic lines MON810 maize, Bt-176 maize and
Roundup Ready soybean, are presented in Session 7.
Different PCR approaches have been developed for the detection of approved
GMOs. PCR specificity depends upon accurate choice of primers. PCR primers can
be directed to different elements used in the transformation process. Broad range
PCR detection systems, generally called screening methods, can be obtained by
designing primers specific to the most common sequences used in transformation.
These are generally the regulatory sequences (promoter and terminator). Genetically
modified plants can also be divided into categories according to the structural gene
introduced. An additional way to direct specificity of the reaction is to choose primers
specific to DNA sequences located in different genetic elements (e.g. promoter-
structural gene, structural gene-terminator). Finally, provided that the specific and
complete sequence information is available, in order to produce really specific
methods for a given genetically modified plant, line specific (transformation event
specific) systems can be developed by selecting a unique sequence combination,
present only in that specific transformed line. This is generally obtained by designing
primers hybridising in the DNA region spanning the integration site junction. The
junction between inserted DNA (T-DNA) and host-DNA offers a unique nucleotide
sequence providing an ideal target for a highly specific PCR test. The methods
performed during the course are summarised in Figure 1, and described in detail in
Session 8. The experimental part of the methods, and protocols, can be found in
Session 9.
As indicated above, the need of quantifying the amount of GMO present in a sample
led to the development of many PCR-based protocols, which allow not only a
qualitative answer (presence/absence), but also a more or less precise (depending

on the method chosen) indication of the relative quantity of GMO present in a given
sample. The two most common DNA-based approaches are competitive PCR and
real-time PCR (Session 10). Real-time PCR is performed using specific and
sophisticated instrumentation, currently available from only a few commercial
companies. The protocols that will be followed during the course can be found in
Session 11.
Finally, Session 12 gives a general introduction to the serological approach for the
detection of genetically modified organisms. In particular the ELISA technique will be
explained and the protocol for conducting of a Roundup Ready specific ELISA test
will be provided.



Not performed during
the course

Raw and processed
materials

Lectin-PCR for soybean
and zein-PCR for maize

Plant DNA present No plant DNA detectable

Detection of regulatory elements
(35S promoter and nos terminator)

GM Plant Non GM Plant

Figure 1. Flowchart of methods performed during the course.

DNA extraction
Plant DNA check by PCR
+
Screening PCR
Sampling
Homogenisation
-
+ -
Specific GMO
detection by
nested PCR
GMO
quantification by
real-time PCR
DNA quantification
using
spectrophotometry
Detection of GMOs
using ELISA

References
Lipp, M., Anklam, E. and Stave, J.W. (2000). Validation of an immunoassay for
detection and quantification of a genetically modified soybean in food and food
fractions using reference materials: Interlaboratory study. Journal of AOAC
International 83, 919927.

Lipp, M., Bluth, A., Eyquem, F., Kruse, L., Schimmel, H., Van den Eede, G. and
Anklam, E. (2001). Validation of a method based on polymerase chain reaction
for the detection of genetically modified organisms in various processed
foodstuffs. European Food Research Technology 212, 497-504.

Lipp, M., Brodmann, P., Pietsch, K., Pauwels, J. and Anklam, E. (1999). IUPAC
collaborative trial study of a method to detect genetically modified soy beans and
maize in dried powder. Journal of AOAC International 82, 923928.

Pietsch, K., Waiblinger, H.-U., Brodmann, P. and Wurz, A. (1997). Screening-
Verfahren zur Identifizierung gentechnisch vernderter plfanzlicher
Lebensmittel. Deutsche Lebensmittel Rundschau 93, 3538.

Trapmann. S., Catalani, P., Conneely, P., Corbisier, P., Gancberg, D., Hannes, E.,
Le Guern, L., Kramer, G. N., Prokisch, J., Robouch, P., Schimmel, H., Zeleny, R.,
Pauwels, J., Van den Eede, G., Weighardt, F., Mazzara, M. and Anklam, E.
(2002). The certification of reference materials of dry-mixed soya powder with
different mass fractions of Roundup Ready soya. Certified Reference Materials
IRMM-410S.
(https://irmm.jrc.ec.europa.eu/html/reference_materials_catalogue/catalogue/atta
chements/ERM-BF410_report.pdf) (accessed January 2010)

Trapmann, S., Le Guern, L., Prokisch, J., Robouch, P., Kramer, G. N., Schimmel, H.,
Pauwels, J., Querci, M., Van den Eede, G. and Anklam, E. (2001). The
certification of reference materials of dry mixed maize powder with different mass
fractions of MON810 maize. Certified Reference Materials IRMM-413.





Session 3

Samples Used during the Course

M. Querci, N. Foti

Samples Used during the Course 2


Table of Contents

Session 3

Samples Used during the Course

Samples used during the course 3
Certified Reference Material 3
Composition of raw and processed materials distributed to the participants 4
List of samples distributed during the course 6
Expected results by PCR 6

References 7


Samples used during the course
During the course we will test different methods to detect the presence of MON810
maize and Roundup Ready soybean in different materials. For this purpose, we will
use mixtures of non-GM and GM maize (MON810) and soybean (Roundup Ready
soybean) respectively, at different concentrations. Two types of materials will be
used:
Certified Reference Materials
Different raw and processed materials distributed to the participants

Certified Reference Material
Raw plant materials used during the course are Certified Reference Materials IRMM-
410S (Roundup Ready soybean) and IRMM-413 (MON810 maize). IRMM-410S
and IRMM-413 consist of two sets of CRMs of dried soybean and maize powder,
respectively, with different mass fractions (0, 0.1, 0.5, 1, 2, and 5%) of dried powder
prepared from genetically modified Roundup Ready soybean and MON810 maize.
The CRMs were produced by the Institute for Reference Materials and
Measurements (IRMM - http://irmm.jrc.ec.europa.eu/html/homepage.htm) on behalf
of Fluka Chemie AG (Buchs, Switzerland) in the frame of a collaboration with the
Institute for Health and Consumer Protection (IHCP - http://ihcp.jrc.ec.europa.eu/) of
the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission (Ispra, Italy) (Trapmann et
al., 2002 and 2001). They are intended for the validation of methods for the detection
of genetically modified food. As DNA and/or protein quantification may depend on
varieties, one has to exercise due care when drawing quantitative conclusions from
measurements of unknown samples.
The dried soybean powder containing GM Roundup Ready soybean has been
produced from whole seeds of a non-modified soy line (Asgrow A1900) and the
genetically modified event 40-3-2 Roundup Ready soybean (Asgrow line AG5602
RR). The dried maize powder containing GM MON810 maize has been produced
from whole kernels of the non-modified cultivar DK512 and MON810 cultivar DK513.


Composition of raw and processed materials distributed to the
participants
We will test different materials: biscuit, milk powder, snack food crumb and flour.

Raw materials
Mixed Flour. In order to obtain 0.5% of each GMO event (total dry weight) 1% of RR
soya (IRMM-410S) was added to 1% MON810 (IRMM-413). 50 mg of both flours
were weighed and added directly to reaction tubes ready for DNA extraction. Flour
MON810 1% is a Certified Reference Materials IRMM-413 (1% MON810 maize).

Snack food crumb
This sample is derived from a GMO proficiency testing cheme (GeMMA Scheme,
Round 06, test material GMO-06B). The material was prepared from commercially
available GM free soya-based dried snack food and GM-containing soya snack food.

Snack food crumb

1372 g GM-free soya snack food, 28 g GM soya snack food

Before mixing, both materials were ground and sieved to give a homogenous crumb
mix and then tumble-blended overnight. Finally, materials were mixed for
approximately one hour using a rotary blender. Storage of the materials was at
20C.

Biscuit
The material was produced at the JRC Institute for Health and Consumer Protection
and was used to validate a PCR method for both Roundup Ready soybean and
Maximizer maize (Bt-176) in processed food fractions (Lipp et al., 2001).
Dry soybean and maize derived flour were weighed and mixed with the other
ingredients in the proportion indicated below.

Biscuits # 1

250 g maize (0% GMO), 250 g soybean (0% GMO), 300 g wheat, 200 g sugar,
100 g butter, 10 g salt, 16 g vanilla baking powder, 2 eggs

The ingredients were carefully mixed with 600 ml water and homogenised, spread
out evenly on a baking plate and baked in a pre-heated oven at 180C with

recirculating air for 10 min. The material was removed from the oven, covered to
avoid contamination and allowed to cool to room temperature. Storage was at 20C.

Soya milk powder
This sample is derived from Round 05 GeMMA proficiency testing scheme.
1700 g of US soybean milk powder were tumble blended overnight with 300 g of
Roundup Ready soybean protein isolate. Individual sub-samples (10 g) were
dispensed into screw topped plastic containers and stored at ambient temperature
prior to distribution.

Biscuits MON810
This material was produced at the JRC Biotechnology and GMOs Unit.
Dry maize derived flour was weighed and mixed with the other ingredients in the
proportions indicated below.

Biscuits MON810

200 g wheat flour, 100 g maize flour* (2
*
% GMO), 150 g sugar, 100 g
butter, 1 egg

*2% MON810 maize flour was obtained by adding wild type maize flour to 100%
MON810 flour and mixing for 30 minutes.

The ingredients were carefully mixed, spread out evenly on a baking tray and baked
in a pre-heated oven at 180C with recirculating air for 10 min. The material was
removed from the oven, covered to avoid contamination and allowed to cool to room
temperature. Storage was at 4C until required.


List of samples distributed during the course

Characteristics
% GMO (specific ingredient)

Sample
RR soybean MON810 maize

Biscuits #1 0% 0%
Mixed flour 1% 1%
Flour MON810 - 1%
Snack food crumb 2.2% -
Soya milk powder 8.9% -
Biscuits MON810

- 2%

Expected results by PCR

Sample zein lectin 35S nos E35S/hsp70(b) CTP/EPSPS

IRMM- 410S-0 (0%) - + - - - -
IRMM- 410S-1 (0.1%) - + + + - +
IRMM- 410S-2 (0.5%) - + + + - +
IRMM- 410S-3 (1%) - + + + - +
IRMM- 410S-4 (2%) - + + + - +
IRMM- 413-0 (0%) + - - - - -
IRMM- 413-1 (0.1%) + - + - + -
IRMM- 413-2 (0.5%) + - + - + -
IRMM- 413-3 (1%) + - + - + -
IRMM- 413-4 (2%) + - + - + -
Biscuits #1 + + - - - -
Mixed flour + + + + + +
Flour MON810 + - + - + -
Snack food crumb - + + + - +
Soya milk powder - + + + - +
Biscuits MON810

+ - + - + -


References


Trapmann. S., Catalani, P., Conneely, P., Corbisier, P., Gancberg, D., Hannes, E.,
Le Guern, L., Kramer, G. N., Prokisch, J., Robouch, P., Schimmel, H., Zeleny, R.,
Pauwels, J., Van den Eede, G., Weighardt, F., Mazzara, M. and Anklam, E.
(2002). The certification of reference materials of dry-mixed soya powder with
different mass fractions of Roundup Ready soya. Certified Reference Materials
IRMM-410S.

Trapmann, S., Le Guern, L., Prokisch, J., Robouch, P., Kramer, G. N., Schimmel, H.,
Pauwels, J., Querci, M., Van den Eede, G. and Anklam, E. (2001). The
certification of reference materials of dry-mixed maize powder with different mass
fractions of MON810 maize. Certified Reference Materials IRMM-413.

GeMMA Scheme-GMO analysis Round 06. GMO Proficiency Testing, (October
2001). Report N. GMO 06.

GeMMA Scheme-GMO analysis Round 05. GMO Proficiency Testing, (October
2001). Report N. GMO 05.





Session 4

Extraction and Purification of DNA

M. Somma

Extraction and Purification of DNA 2


Table of Contents

Session 4

Extraction and Purification of DNA

Introduction 3

Extraction methods 4
Purification methods 4
CTAB extraction and purification method 6
Quantification of DNA by spectrophotometry 9
Principles of spectrophotometric determination of DNA 9
Determination of the concentration of nucleic acids 11

Experimental 13

References 17


Introduction
Extraction and purification of nucleic acids is the first step in most molecular biology
studies and in all recombinant DNA techniques. Here the objective of nucleic acid
extraction methods is to obtain purified nucleic acids from various sources with the
aim of conducting a GM specific analysis using the Polymerase Chain Reaction
(PCR). Quality and purity of nucleic acids are some of the most critical factors for
PCR analysis. In order to obtain highly purified nucleic acids free from inhibiting
contaminants, suitable extraction methods should be applied. The possible
contaminants that could inhibit the performance of the PCR analysis are listed in
Table 1. In order to avoid the arising of a false negative result due to the presence of
PCR inhibitors in the sample, it is highly recommended to perform a control
experiment to test PCR inhibition. For this purpose, a plant-specific (eukaryote or
chloroplast) or species-specific PCR analysis is commonly used.

Table 1. Some inhibitors of the PCR process
Inhibitor Inhibiting concentration
SDS > 0.005%
Phenol > 0.2%
Ethanol > 1%
Isopropanol > 1%
Sodium acetate > 5 mM
Sodium chloride > 25 mM
EDTA > 0.5 mM
Hemoglobin > 1 mg/ml
Heparin > 0.15 i.u./ml
Urea > 20 mM
Reaction mixture > 15%

As a wide variety of methods exist for extraction and purification of nucleic acids, the
choice of the most suitable technique is generally based on the following criteria:
Target nucleic acid
Source organism
Starting material (tissue, leaf, seed, processed material, etc.)
Desired results (yield, purity, purification time required, etc.)
Downstream application (PCR, cloning, labelling, blotting, RT-PCR, cDNA
synthesis, etc.)
The principles of some of the most common methodologies used today for the
extraction and purification of nucleic acids are described in the following sections.

Extraction methods
The extraction of nucleic acids from biological material requires cell lysis, inactivation
of cellular nucleases and separation of the desired nucleic acid from cellular debris.
Often, the ideal lysis procedure is a compromise of techniques and must be rigorous
enough to disrupt the complex starting material (e.g. tissue), yet gentle enough to
preserve the target nucleic acid. Common lysis procedures include:
Mechanical disruption (e.g. grinding, hypotonic lysis)
Chemical treatment (e.g. detergent lysis, chaotropic agents, thiol reduction)
Enzymatic digestion (e.g. proteinase K)
Cell membrane disruption and inactivation of intracellular nucleases may be
combined. For instance, a single solution may contain detergents to solubilise cell
membranes and strong chaotropic salts to inactivate intracellular enzymes. After cell
lysis and nuclease inactivation, cellular debris may easily be removed by filtration or
precipitation.
Purification methods
Methods for purifying nucleic acids from cell extracts are usually combinations of two
or more of the following techniques:
Extraction/precipitation
Chromatography
Centrifugation
Affinity separation
A brief description of these techniques will be given in the following paragraphs
(Zimmermann et al., 1998).

Extraction/Precipitation
Solvent extraction is often used to eliminate contaminants from nucleic acids. For
example, a combination of phenol and chloroform is frequently used to remove
proteins. Precipitation with isopropanol or ethanol is generally used to concentrate
nucleic acids. If the amount of target nucleic acid is low, an inert carrier (such as
glycogen) can be added to the mixture to increase precipitation efficiency. Other
precipitation methods of nucleic acids include selective precipitation using high
concentrations of salt (salting out) or precipitation of proteins using changes in pH.

Chromatography
Chromatography methods may utilise different separation techniques such as gel
filtration, ion exchange, selective adsorption, or affinity binding. Gel filtration exploits
the molecular sieving properties of porous gel particles. A matrix with defined pore
size allows smaller molecules to enter the pores by diffusion, whereas bigger
molecules are excluded from the pores and eluted at the void volume. Thus,
molecules are eluted in order of decreasing molecular size. Ion exchange
chromatography is another technique that utilises an electrostatic interaction between
a target molecule and a functional group on the column matrix. Nucleic acids (highly
negatively charged, linear polyanions) can be eluted from ion exchange columns with
simple salt buffers. In adsorption chromatography, nucleic acids adsorb selectively
onto silica or glass in the presence of certain salts (e. g. chaotropic salts), while other
biological molecules do not. A low salt buffer or water can then elute the nucleic
acids, producing a sample that may be used directly in downstream applications.
Centrifugation
Selective centrifugation is a powerful purification method. For example
ultracentrifugation in self-forming CsCl gradients at high g-forces has long been used
for plasmid purification. Frequently, centrifugation is combined with another method.
An example of this is spin column chromatography that combines gel filtration and
centrifugation to purify DNA or RNA from smaller contaminants (salts, nucleotides,
etc.), for buffer exchange, or for size selection. Some procedures combine selective
adsorption on a chromatographic matrix (see above paragraph Chromatography)
with centrifugal elution to selectively purify one type of nucleic acid.
Affinity separation
In recent years, more and more purification methods have combined affinity
immobilisation of nucleic acids with magnetic separation. For instance, poly(A) +
mRNA may be bound to streptavidin-coated magnetic particles by biotin-labelled
oligo(dT) and the particle complex removed from the solution (and unbound
contaminants) with a magnet. This solid phase technique simplifies nucleic acid
purification since it can replace several steps of centrifugation, organic extraction and
phase separation with a single, rapid magnetic separation step.


CTAB extraction and purification method
The cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) protocol, which was first developed by
Murray and Thompson in 1980 (Murray and Thompson, 1980), was successively
published by Wagner and co-workers in 1987 (Wagner et al., 1987). The method is
appropriate for the extraction and purification of DNA from plants and plant derived
foodstuff and is particularly suitable for the elimination of polysaccharides and
polyphenolic compounds otherwise affecting the DNA purity and therefore quality.
This procedure has been widely applied in molecular genetics of plants and already
been tested in validation trials in order to detect GMOs (Lipp et al., 1999; 2001).
Several additional variants have been developed to adapt the method to a wide
range of raw and processed food matrices (Hupfer et al., 1998; Hotzel et al., 1999;
Meyer et al., 1997; Poms et al., 2001).

Principles of CTAB method: lysis, extraction and precipitation
Plant cells can be lysed with the ionic detergent cetyltrimethylammonium bromide
(CTAB), which forms an insoluble complex with nucleic acids in a low-salt
environment. Under these conditions, polysaccharides, phenolic compounds and
other contaminants remain in the supernatant and can be washed away. The DNA
complex is solubilised by raising the salt concentration and precipitated with ethanol
or isopropanol. In this section, the principles of these three main steps, lysis of the
cell membrane, extraction of the genomic DNA and its precipitation will be described.

Lysis of the cell membrane. As previously mentioned, the first step of the DNA
extraction is the rupture of the cell and nucleus wall. For this purpose, the
homogenised sample is first treated with the extraction buffer containing EDTA
Tris/HCl and CTAB. All biological membranes have a common overall structure
comprising lipid and protein molecules held together by non-covalent interactions.



Figure 1. Simplified representation of the cell membranes
1

As shown in Figure 1, the lipid molecules are arranged as a continuous double layer
in which the protein molecules are dissolved. The lipid molecules are constituted
by hydrophilic ends called heads and hydrophobic ends called tails. In the CTAB
method the lysis of the membrane is accomplished by the detergent (CTAB)
contained in the extraction buffer. Because of the similar composition of both the
lipids and the detergent, the CTAB component of the extraction buffer has the
function of capturing the lipids constituting the cell and nucleus membrane. The
mechanism of solubilisation of the lipids using a detergent is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Lipid solubilisation

Figure 3 illustrates how, when the cell membrane is exposed to the CTAB extraction
buffer, the detergent captures the lipids and the proteins allowing the release of the
genomic DNA. In a specific salt (NaCl) concentration, the detergent forms an
insoluble complex with the nucleic acids. EDTA is a chelating component that among
other metals binds magnesium. Magnesium is a cofactor for DNase. By binding Mg
with EDTA, the activity of present DNase is decreased. Tris/HCl gives the solution a
pH buffering capacity (a low or high pH damages DNA). It is important to notice that,

1
Pictures in current and following page: "Genetic Science Learning Center, University of Utah,
http://gslc.genetics.utah.edu."

since nucleic acids can easily degrade at this stage of the purification, the time
between the homogenisation of the sample and the addition of the CTAB buffer
solution should be minimised. After the cell and the organelle membranes (such as
those around the mitochondria and chloroplasts) have been broken apart, the
purification of DNA is performed.

Figure 3: Disruption of the cellular membrane and extraction of genomic DNA

Extraction. In this step, polysaccharides, phenolic compounds, proteins and other
cell lysates dissolved in the aqueous solution are separated from the CTAB nucleic
acid complex. The elimination of the polysaccharides as well as phenolic
compounds is particularly important because of their capability to inhibit a great
number of enzymatic reactions. Under low salt concentration (< 0.5 M NaCl), the
contaminants of the nucleic acid complex do not precipitate and can be removed by
extraction of the aqueous solution with chloroform. The chloroform denatures the
proteins and facilitates the separation of the aqueous and organic phases. Normally,
the aqueous phase forms the upper phase. However, if the aqueous phase is dense
because of salt concentration (> 0.5 M), it will form the lower phase. In addition, the
nucleic acid will tend to partition into the organic phase if the pH of the aqueous
solution has not been adequately equilibrated to a value of pH 7.8 - 8.0. If needed,
the extraction with chloroform is performed two or three times in order to completely
remove the impurities from the aqueous layer. To achieve the best recovery of
nucleic acid, the organic phase may be back-extracted with an aqueous solution that
is then added to the prior extract. Once the nucleic acid complex has been purified,
the last step of the procedure, precipitation, can be accomplished.

Precipitation. In this final stage, the nucleic acid is liberated from the detergent. For
this purpose, the aqueous solution is first treated with a precipitation solution
comprising a mixture of CTAB and NaCl at elevated concentration (> 0.8 M NaCl).
The salt is needed for the formation of a nucleic acid precipitate. Sodium acetate may

be preferred over NaCl for its buffering capacity. Under these conditions, the
detergent, which is more soluble in alcohol than in water, can be washed out, while
the nucleic acid precipitates. The successive treatment with 70% ethanol allows an
additional purification, or wash, of the nucleic acid from the remaining salt.
Quantification of DNA by spectrophotometry
DNA, RNA, oligonucleotides and even mononucleotides can be measured directly in
aqueous solutions in a diluted or undiluted form measuring the absorption A (also
defined as optical density, OD) in ultraviolet light (but also in the visible range). If the
sample is pure (i.e. without significant amounts of contaminants such as proteins,
phenol or agarose), the spectrophotometric measurement of the amount of ultraviolet
irradiation absorbed by the bases is simple and accurate. For this method, aqueous
buffers with low ion concentrations (e.g. TE buffer) are ideal. The concentration of
nucleic acids is usually determined by measuring at 260 nm against a blank.
Interference by contaminants can be recognised by the calculation of a ratio. Since
proteins absorb at 280 nm, the ratio A
260
/A
280
is used to estimate the purity of nucleic
acid. Pure DNA should have a ratio of approximately 1.8, whereas pure RNA should
give a value of approximately 2.0. Absorption at 230 nm reflects contamination of the
sample by substances such as carbohydrates, peptides, phenols or aromatic
compounds. In the case of pure samples, the ratio A
260
/A
230
should be approximately
2.2.
An alternative method, the ethidium bromide agarose plate method, is useful when
only small quantities of nucleic acid are available; the amount of nucleic acid can be
estimated, when compared to a range of concentration standards, from the intensity
of fluorescence emitted by the ethidium bromide when irradiated with UV light.
Principles of spectrophotometric determination of DNA
A spectrophotometer makes use of the transmission of light through a solution to
determine the concentration of a solute within the solution. The apparatus operates
on the basis of a simple principle in which light of a known wavelength passes
through a sample and the amount of light energy transmitted is measured with a
photocell on the other side of the sample.
As shown in Figure 4, the design of the single beam spectrophotometer involves a
light source, a prism, a sample holder and a photocell. Connected to each are the
appropriate electrical or mechanical systems to control the illumination intensity, the
wavelength and for the conversion of energy received at the photocell into a voltage

fluctuation. The voltage fluctuation is then displayed on a meter scale, or is recorded
via connection to a computer for later investigation.

Figure 4. Schematic light transmission

All molecules absorb radiant energy at a specific wavelength, from which it is
possible to extrapolate the concentration of a solute within a solution. According to
the Beer-Lambert law there is a linear relationship between the absorbance A (also
called optical density, OD) and the concentration of the macromolecule given by the
following equation:

A = OD = lc (1)

Where is the molar extinction coefficient, c is the concentration; and l is the
pathlength of the cuvette. Proteins and nucleic acids absorb light in the ultraviolet
range within wavelengths of between 210 and 300 nm. As previously explained, the
maximum absorbance of DNA and RNA solutions is at 260 nm whereas the
maximum absorbance of protein solutions is at 280 nm. Since, both DNA and RNA
solutions do partially absorb light at 280 nm, and protein solutions partially absorb
light at 260 nm, the ratio between the readings at 260 nm and 280 nm (A
260
/A
280
)
provides an estimate of the purity of the nucleic acids. Pure preparations of DNA and
RNA have A
260
/A
280
values of 1.8 and 2.0 respectively. For a 10 mm pathway and a
260 nm wavelength, an absorption A = 1 corresponds to approximately 50 g/ml of
dsDNA, approximately 37 g/ml of ssDNA, 40 g/ml of RNA or approximately 30
g/ml of oligonucleotides. If there is contamination with protein, the A
260
/A
280
will be
significantly less than the values given above and accurate quantification of the
amount of nucleic acid will not be possible. It is important to mention the fact that
impurities in DNA solutions caused by RNA cannot be confidently identified by

spectrophotometry. An absorbance of 325 nm can be used to indicate the presence
of debris in the solution or that the cuvette itself is dirty.
Determination of the concentration of nucleic acids
Choice of the cuvette. The amount of nucleic acid solution used for the
measurement of the absorbance A, depends on the capacity of the cuvette. A
suitable cuvette should be chosen depending on sample concentration range, dilution
factor and available sample volume. In most of the procedures used for the detection
of GMOs the volume of genomic DNA collected is between 50 and 100 l. Several
types of microvolume cuvettes with a capacity of 5 to 70 l are utilised for the
spectroscopic quantification of small volumes of nucleic acids.

Set up. In order to calibrate the spectrophotometer, it is important:
to set the correct cell pathlength
to set the correct factor (select between dsDNA, ssDNA, RNA)
to measure a blank solution (set reference) constituted by either water or a buffer
solution (A
260
= 0)
to ensure that the set reference is renewed periodically
to measure a known amount of pure nucleic acid in order to check the reliability of
set reference

Measurement of an unknown sample. Depending on the capacity of the cuvette
used, specific amounts of DNA solution are used for the concentration evaluation
(e.g. for cuvette of capacity lower than 0.2 ml, 5 l of DNA is diluted in 195 l of
water). After calibrating the spectrophotometer and the addition of the nucleic acid
solution, the cuvette is capped, the solution mixed, and the absorbance measured. In
order to reduce pipetting errors, the measurement should be repeated at least twice
and at least 5 l of the DNA solution should always be used. A
260
readings lower
than 0.02 or between 1 and 1.5 (depending on the instrument used) are not
recommended because of the possibility of a high margin of error.
The concentration c of a specific nucleic acid present in a solution is calculated using
the following equations:
Single-stranded DNA: c(pmol/l) = A
260
/0.027
Double-stranded DNA: c(pmol/l) = A
260
/0.020
Single-stranded RNA: c(pmol/l) = A
260
/0.025
Oligonucleotide: c(pmol/l) = A
260
100/1.5N
A
+0.71N
C
+1.20N
G
+

0.84N
T


where A
260
is the absorbance measured at 260 nm.

An example of absorbance readings of highly purified calf thymus DNA suspended in
1x TNE buffer assuming that the reference DNA is dsDNA with A
260
= 1 for 50 g/ml
in a 10 mm pathlength cuvette is shown in Table 2. The concentration of DNA was
nominally 25 g/ml.

Table 2. Absorbance reading of highly purified calf thymus DNA in 1x TNE buffer

Wavelength Absorbance A
260
/A
280
Conc. (g/ml)
325 0.01 - -
280 0.28 - -
260 0.56 2.0 28
230 0.30 - -


Experimental
Equipment

REMARK
All of the equipment used must be sterilised prior to use and any residue of DNA
must be removed. In order to avoid contamination, barrier pipette tips that are
protected against aerosol should be used.

Instruments for size reduction like a sterile surgical blade or a mortar
Water bath or heating block
Microcentrifuge
Micropipettes
Vortex mixer
1.5 ml microcentrifuge tubes
Weigh boats or equivalents
Spatulas
Balance capable of 0.01 g measurement
Loops
Rack for microcentrifuge tubes
Optional: vacuum desiccator to dry DNA pellets

Reagents

REMARK
All chemicals should be of molecular biology grade. Deionised water and buffers
should be autoclaved prior to use. In addition all chemicals should be DNA and
DNase free.

Cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) CAS 124-03-8
Chloroform
Isopropanol
Na
2
EDTA CAS 6381-92-6
Ethanol
NaCl

Proteinase K
RNase A
Tris[hydroxymethyl] aminomethane hydrochloride (Tris-HCl)
Sterile deionised water

CTAB-buffer

20 g/l CTAB 4 g
1.4 M NaCl 16.4 g
0.1 M Tris-HCl 3.15 g
20 mM Na
2
EDTA 1.5 g
add 100 ml of deionised water
adjust pH to a value of 8.0 with 1M NaOH
fill up to 200 ml and autoclave
store buffer at 4C for max. 6 months

CTAB-precipitation solution

5 g/l CTAB 1 g
0.04 M NaCl 0.5 g
add 100 ml of deionised water
adjust pH to a value of 8.0 with 1 M NaOH
fill up to 200 ml and autoclave
store solution at 4C for max. 6 months

NaCl 1.2 M

dissolve 7.0 g of NaCl in 100 ml deionised water
autoclave and store at room temperature

Ethanol-solution 70 % (v/v)

70 ml of pure ethanol are mixed with 30 ml of sterile deionised water.

RNase A 10 mg/ml store at 20C


Proteinase K 20 mg/ml store at 20C

Procedure

The procedure requires sterile conditions. Contamination may be avoided during
sample preparation by using single-use equipment, decontamination solutions and by
avoiding the formation of dust.

transfer 100 mg of a homogeneous sample into a sterile 1.5 ml microcentrifuge
tube
add 300 l of sterile deionised water, mix with a loop
add 500 l of CTAB-buffer, mix with a loop
Add 20 l Proteinase K (20 mg/ml), shake and incubate at 65C for 30-90 min
*

Add 20 l RNase A (10 mg/ml), shake and incubate at 65C for 5-10 min
*

centrifuge for 10 min at about 16,000 xg
transfer supernatant to a microcentrifuge tube containing 500 l chloroform,
shake for 30 sec
centrifuge for 10 min at 16,000 xg until phase separation occurs
transfer 500 l of upper layer into a new microcentrifuge tube containing 500 l
chloroform, shake
centrifuge for 5 min at 16,000 xg
transfer upper layer to a new microcentrifuge tube
add 2 volumes of CTAB precipitation solution, mix by pipetting
incubate for 60 min at room temperature
discard supernatant
dissolve precipitate in 350 l NaCl (1.2 M)
add 350 l chloroform and shake for 30 sec
centrifuge for 10 min at 16,000 xg until phase separation occurs
transfer upper layer to a new microcentrifuge tube
add 0.6 volumes of isopropanol, shake

*
These additional optional steps are now commonly introduced to the CTAB extraction
method to enhance the yield of genomic DNA from highly complex matrices.


discard the supernatant
add 500 l of 70% ethanol solution and shake carefully
discard supernatant
dry pellets and re-dissolve DNA in 100 l sterile deionised water

The DNA solution may be stored in a refrigerator for a maximum of two weeks, or in
the freezer at - 20C for longer periods.

References
Hotzel, H., Mller, W. and Sachse, K. (1999). Recovery and characterization of
residual DNA from beer as a prerequisite for the detection of genetically modified
ingredients. European Food Research Technology 209, 192-196.

Hupfer, C., Hotzel, H., Sachse, K. and Engel, K.H. (1998). Detection of the genetic
modification in heat-treated products of Bt maize by polymerase chain reaction.
Zeitschrift fr Lebensmittel-Untersuchung und -Forschung A 206, 203-207.



Meyer, R. and Jaccaud, E. (1997). Detection of genetically modified soya in
processed food products: development and validation of PCR assay for the
specific detection of glyphosate-tolerant soybeans. In Amad, R. Battaglia
(Eds.). Proceedings of the ninth European conference on food chemistry (Vol. 1).
Authenticity and adulteration of food-the analytical approach. 24-26 September
1997. Interlaken 1, 23-28. ISBN: 3-9521414-0-2.

Murray, M.G. and Thompson, W.F. (1980). Rapid isolation of high molecular weight
plant DNA. Nucleic Acids Research 8, 43214325.

Poms, R.E., Glssl, J. and Foissy, H. (2001). Increased sensitivity for detection of
specific target DNA in milk by concentration in milk fat. European Food Research
Technology 213, 361-365.

Wagner, D.B., Furnier, G.R., Saghay-Maroof, M.A., Williams, S.M., Dancik, B.P. and
Allard, R.W. (1987). Chloroplast DNA polymorphisms in lodgepole and jack pines

and their hybrids. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 84,
20972100.

Zimmermann, A., Lthy, J. and Pauli, U. (1998). Quantitative and qualitative
evaluation of nine different extraction methods for nucleic acids on soya bean
food samples. Zeitschrift fr Lebensmittel-Untersuchung und -Forschung A 207,
8190.





Session 5

Agarose Gel Electrophoresis

M. Somma, M. Querci

Agarose Gel Electrophoresis 2


Table of Contents

Session 5

Agarose Gel Electrophoresis

Introduction 3

Physical principles of agarose gel electrophoresis 3
Components of agarose gel electrophoresis 6

Experimental 8

References 12


Introduction
Gel electrophoresis is a method that separates macromolecules on the basis of size,
electric charge and other physical properties. The term electrophoresis describes the
migration of charged particles under the influence of an electric field. Electro refers
to electricity and Phoresis, from the Greek word phoros, meaning, "to carry across."
Thus, gel electrophoresis refers to a technique in which molecules are forced across
a span of gel, motivated by an electrical current. The driving force for electrophoresis
is the voltage applied to electrodes at either end of the gel. The properties of a
molecule determine how rapidly an electric field can move it through a gelatinous
medium.
Many important biological macromolecules (e.g. amino acids, peptides, proteins,
nucleotides and nucleic acids) possess ionisable groups and, at any given pH, exist
in solution as electrically charged species either as cations (+) or anions (-).
Depending on the nature of the net charge, the charged particles will migrate either
to the cathode or to the anode. For example, when an electric field is applied across
a gel at neutral pH, the negatively charged phosphate groups of the DNA cause it to
migrate toward the anode (Westermeier, 1997).
Electrophoresis through agarose is a standard method used to separate, identify and
purify DNA fragments. The technique is simple, rapid to perform, and capable of
resolving fragments of DNA that cannot be separated adequately by other
procedures. Furthermore, the location of DNA within the gel can be determined by
staining with a low concentration of ethidium bromide, a fluorescent intercalating dye.
The following sections will outline the physical principles, components (gel matrix,
buffer, loading buffer and marker) and procedures for the preparation of agarose gel
electrophoresis (Sambrook et al., 1989).
Physical principles of agarose gel electrophoresis
Gel electrophoresis is a technique used for the separation of nucleic acids and
proteins. Separation of macromolecules depends upon two variables: charge and
mass. When a biological sample, such as DNA, is mixed in a buffer solution and
applied to a gel, these two variables act together. The electrical current from one
electrode repels the molecules while the other electrode simultaneously attracts the
molecules. The frictional force of the gel material acts as a "molecular sieve",
separating the molecules by size. During electrophoresis, macromolecules are

forced to move through the pores and their rate of migration through the electric field
depends on the following:
the strength of the field
the size and shape of the molecules
the relative hydrophobicity of the samples
the ionic strength and temperature of the buffer in which the molecules are
moving.
To completely understand the separation of charged particles in gel electrophoresis,
it is important to look at the simple equations relating to electrophoresis. When a
voltage is applied across the electrodes, a potential gradient, E, is generated and can
be expressed by the equation:
E = V/d (1)
where V, measured in volts, is the applied voltage and d the distance in cm between
the electrodes.
When the potential gradient, E, is applied, a force, F, on a charged molecule is
generated and is expressed by the equation:
F = Eq (2)
where q is the charge in coulombs bearing on the molecule. It is this force,
measured in Newtons that drives a charged molecule towards an electrode.
There is also a frictional resistance that slows down the movement of charged
molecules. This frictional force is a function of:
the hydrodynamic size of the molecule
the shape of the molecule
the pore size of the medium in which electrophoresis is taking place
the viscosity of the buffer
The velocity v of a charged molecule in an electric field is a function of the potential
gradient, charge and frictional force of the molecule and can be expressed by the
equation:
v = Eq / f (3)
where f is the frictional coefficient.
The electrophoretic mobility, M, of an ion can then be defined by the ions velocity
divided by the potential gradient:
M = v / E (4)
In addition, from equation (3) one can see that electrophoretic mobility M can be
equivalently expressed as the charge of the molecule, q, divided by the frictional
coefficient, f:

M = q / f (5)
When a potential difference is applied, molecules with different overall charges will
begin to separate due to their different electrophoretic mobilities. The electrophoretic
mobility is a significant and characteristic parameter of a charged molecule or particle
and depends on the pK value of the charged group and the size of the molecule or
particle. Even molecules with similar charges will begin to separate if they have
different molecular sizes, since they will experience different frictional forces. Linear
double stranded DNA migrates through gel matrices at rates that are inversely
proportional to the log
10
of the number of base pairs. Larger molecules migrate more
slowly because of the greater frictional drag and because of the less efficient
movement through the pores of the gel.
The current in the solution between the electrodes is conducted mainly by the buffer
ions with a small proportion being conducted by the sample ions. The relationship
between current I, voltage V, and resistance R is expressed as in Ohms law:
R = V / I (6)
This equation demonstrates that for a given resistance R, it is possible to accelerate
an electrophoretic separation by increasing the applied voltage V, which would result
in a corresponding increase in the current flow I. The distance migrated will be
proportional to both current and time. However, the increase in voltage, V, and the
corresponding increase in current, I, would cause one of the major problems for most
forms of electrophoresis, namely the generation of heat. This can be illustrated by
the following equation in which the power, W, (measured in Watts) generated during
the electrophoresis is equal to the product of the resistance times the square of the
current:
W = I
2
R (7)
Since most of the power produced in the electrophoretic process is dissipated as
heat the following detrimental effects can result:
an increased rate of diffusion of sample and buffer ions leading to broadening of
the separated samples
the formation of convection currents, which leads to mixing of separated samples;
thermal instability of samples that are rather sensitive to heat (e.g. denaturation of
DNA)
a decrease of buffer viscosity hence a reduction in the resistance of the medium


Components of agarose gel electrophoresis
Agarose
Agarose, a natural colloid extracted from seaweed, is a linear polysaccharide
(average molecular mass ~12,000 Da) made up of the basic repeated unit
agarobiose, which comprises alternating units of galactose and 3,6-
anhydrogalactose. Agarose is very fragile and easily destroyed by handling. Agarose
gels have large "pore" sizes and are used primarily to separate large molecules with
a molecular mass greater than 200 kDa.
Agarose gels process quickly, but with limited resolution since the bands formed in
the agarose gels tend to be fuzzy/diffuse and spread apart. This is a result of pore
size and cannot be controlled. Agarose gels are obtained by suspending dry
powdered agarose in an aqueous buffer, then boiling the mixture until the agarose
melts into a clear solution. The solution is then poured onto a gel-tray and allowed to
cool to room temperature to form a rigid gel. Upon hardening, the agarose forms a
matrix whose density is determined by its concentration.
Electrophoresis buffer
The electrophoretic mobility of DNA is affected by the composition and ionic strength
of the electrophoresis buffer. In the absence of ions, electrical conductance is
minimal and DNA migrates slowly, if at all. In a buffer of high ionic strength electrical
conductance is very efficient and a significant amount of heat is generated. In the
worst circumstance, the gel melts and the DNA denatures.
Several buffers are available for electrophoresis of native double-stranded DNA.
These contain EDTA (pH 8.0) and Tris-acetate (TAE), Tris-borate (TBE), or Tris-
phosphate (TPE) at a concentration of approximately 50 mM (pH 7.5 - 7.8).
Electrophoresis buffers are usually prepared as concentrated solutions and stored at
room temperature. TBE was originally used at a working strength of 1x for agarose
gel electrophoresis. However, a working solution of 0.5x provides more than enough
buffering power and almost all agarose gel electrophoresis is now carried out using
this buffer concentration.
Agarose concentration
A DNA fragment of a given size migrates at different rates through gels depending on
the concentration of agarose. For a specific concentration of agarose and/or buffer, it
is possible to separate DNA segments containing between 20 and 50,000 bp. In

horizontal gels, agarose is usually used at concentrations between 0.7% and 3%
(see Table 1).

Table 1. Recommended agarose gel concentration for resolving linear DNA molecules

% agarose DNA size range (bp)
0.75 10.000 - 15.000
1.0 500 - 10.000
1.25 300 - 5000
1.5 200 - 4000
2.0 100 - 2500
2.5 50 - 1000

Marker DNA
For a given voltage, agarose gel and buffer concentrations, the migration distance
depends on the molecular weight of the starting material. Therefore, a marker DNA
of known size should be loaded into slots on both the right and left sides of the gel. A
marker generally contains a defined number of known DNA segments, which makes
it easier to determine the size of the unknown DNAs if any systematic distortion of
the gel should occur during the electrophoresis.
Loading buffer
The DNA samples to be loaded onto the agarose gel are first mixed with a loading
buffer usually comprising water, sucrose, and a dye (e.g. xylene cyanole,
bromophenol blue, bromocresol green, etc.). The maximum amount of DNA that can
be loaded depends on the number of fragments. The minimum amount of DNA that
can be detected by photography of ethidium bromide stained gels is about 2 ng in a
0.5-cm wide band. If there is more than 500 ng of DNA in a band of this width, the
slot will be overloaded, resulting in smearing. The loading buffer serves three
purposes:
increases the density of the sample ensuring that the DNA drops evenly into the
well
adds colour to the sample, thereby simplifying the loading process
imparts a dye to the sample that, in an electric field, moves toward the anode at a
predictable rate

Experimental
Caution: Ethidium bromide is a powerful mutagen/carcinogen and is moderately toxic.
Gloves should always be worn when handling solutions and gels containing ethidium
bromide.

Equipment

Horizontal electrophoresis unit with power supply
Microwave oven or heating stirrer
Micropipettes
1.5 ml reaction tubes
Balance capable of 0.1 g measurements
Spatulas
Rack for reaction tubes
Glassware
Transilluminator (UV radiation, 312 nm)
Instruments for documentation (e.g. Polaroid camera or a video recorder)

Reagents

Agarose, suitable for DNA electrophoresis
Tris[hydroxymethyl] aminomethane (Tris) CAS 77-68-1
Boric acid
Na
2
EDTA CAS 6381-92-6
Ethidium bromide CAS 1239-45-8
Sucrose
Xylene cyanole FF CAS 2650-17-1
DNA markers:
Lambda DNA EcoRI/HindIII digested (or other similar suitable marker)
100 bp DNA ladder


10x TBE buffer (1 litre)

Tris[hydroxymethyl] aminomethane (Tris) 54.0 g
Boric acid 27.5 g
Na
2
EDTA 7.44 g

Mix reagent to deionised water to obtain a 1 litre solution at pH 8.3
Store at room temperature

6x loading buffer (10 ml)

Xylene cyanole FF 0.025 g
Sucrose 4 g

Add sucrose and Xylene cyanole FF to deionised water to obtain 10 ml of solution.
Mix the solution, autoclave and store at 4C.


Procedure

Seal the edges of a clean, dry plastic gel-tray either with tape or other means.
Position the appropriate comb so that complete wells are formed when the
agarose solution is added
Dilute 10x TBE buffer to prepare the appropriate amount of 0.5x TBE buffer to fill
the electrophoresis tank and to prepare the gel
Weigh powdered agarose according to Table 2 and add it to an appropriate
amount of 0.5x TBE buffer in an Erlenmeyer flask with a loose-fitting cap (usually
150 ml gel solution for a 15 x 15 cm gel-tray and 100 ml gel for a 15 x 10 cm gel-
tray)

Table 2. Agarose gel concentrations used during the course

G
M
O
3

G
M
O
4

Z
E
I
N
3

Z
E
I
N
4

p
3
5
S
-
c
f
3

p
3
5
S
-
c
r
4

H
A
-
n
o
s
1
1
8
-
f

H
A
-
n
o
s
1
1
8
-
r

C
R
Y
I
A
3

C
R
Y
I
A
4

G
M
0
7

G
M
0
8

m
g
3

m
g
4

G
e
n
o
m
i
c

D
N
A

0.8 - 1% X
1.5% X X
2.0% X X X X X

Heat the slurry in a microwave oven or in a boiling water bath until the agarose
dissolves (check the volume of the solution after heating)
Cool the mixture to 50 - 60C and add ethidium bromide (from a stock solution of
10 mg/ml) to a final concentration of 0.2 g/ml and mix thoroughly
Pour the solution into the gel-tray and allow the gel to set. The amount of gel
used should correspond to a depth of approximately 3 - 5 mm
After the gel is completely set, carefully remove the comb and the tape and place
the gel in the electrophoresis tank.
Add enough 0.5x TBE buffer to the electrophoresis unit to cover the gel to a
depth of about 2 - 5 mm

Prepare samples and marker for genomic DNA as follows:
sample marker

water 3 l water 6 l
loading buffer 2 l loading buffer 2 l
sample 5 l DNA EcoRI / HindIII 2 l
10 l 10 l

Prepare samples and marker for PCR products as follows:
sample marker

loading buffer 2 l 100 bp DNA ladder 15 l
sample 8 l
10 l

Load 10 l of each sample into consecutive wells and the appropriate DNA
marker into the first and last lane
Close the lid of the gel tank and attach the electrical leads so that the DNA will
migrate toward the anode and apply a voltage of 5 - 10 V/cm
Run the gel until the xylene cyanole has migrated the appropriate distance
through the gel (~ 40 - 60 minutes)
Turn off the current; remove the leads and the lid from the gel tank. Place the gel
on a UV lightbox and photograph the gel
Discard the gel into the provided ethidium bromide solid waste bin


References
Sambrook, J., Fritsch, E.F. and Maniatis, T. (1989). Gel electrophoresis of DNA. In:
Sambrook, J., Fritsch, E.F. and Maniatis, T. (Eds.) Molecular Cloning: a
Laboratory Manual. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring
Harbor, NY, USA, chapter 6.

Westermeier, R. (1997). Electrophoresis in Practice: a Guide to Methods and
Applications of DNA and Protein Separation, VCH, Weinheim.





Session 6

The Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)

M. Somma, M. Querci

The Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) 2


Table of Contents

Session 6

The Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)

Introduction 3

Components, structure and replication of DNA 3
Principles of PCR 9
Instrumentation and components for the PCR 12
Design of primers for PCR 17
Specialised PCR 21
PCR in practice 23

References 29


Introduction
The invention of Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) by K. Mullis and co-workers in
1985 has revolutionised molecular biology and molecular medicine (Saiki et al.,
1985). The Polymerase Chain Reaction is an in vitro technique used to enzymatically
amplify a specific DNA region that lies between two regions of known DNA
sequence. Whereas previously only minute amounts of a specific gene could be
obtained, now even a single gene copy can be amplified to a million copies within a
few hours using PCR.
PCR techniques have become essential for many common procedures such as
cloning specific DNA fragments, detecting and identifying genes in diagnostics and
forensics, and in the investigation of gene expression patterns. More recently, PCR
has allowed the investigation of new fields such as the control of the authenticity of
foodstuff, the presence of genetically modified DNA and microbiological
contamination. In understanding the principles of PCR and its applications, the nature
of the DNA molecule must first be considered, therefore the structure and the
replication of DNA will be described in the following section.

Components, structure and replication of DNA
Components. A molecule of DNA is constituted of two parallel complementary
twisted chains of alternating units of phosphoric acid and deoxyribose, linked by
cross-pieces of purine and pyrimidine bases, resulting in a right-handed helical
structure that carries genetic information encoded in the sequence of the bases. In
eucaryotic cells, most of the DNA is contained within the nucleus and is referred to as
chromosomal DNA. It is separated from the rest of the cell (cytoplasm) by a double
layer membrane (nuclear envelope). In addition to this, extrachromosomal DNA can
be found in the mitochondria and chloroplasts.
The building blocks of DNA, called nucleotides, are:
dATP, deoxyadenosine triphosphate;
dGTP, deoxyguanosine triphosphate;
dTTP, deoxythymidine triphosphate;
dCTP, deoxycytidine triphosphate.
For convenience, these four nucleotides are called dNTPs (deoxynucleoside
triphosphates). A nucleotide is constituted of three major parts: a purine base
(adenine, A, and/or guanine, G), or a pyrimidine base (cytosine, C, and/or thymine,

T), a pentose sugar molecule (deoxyribose) and a triphosphate group. As shown in
Figure 1, a purine or pyrimidine base is bound to a pentose ring by an N-glycosydic
bond and a phosphate group is bound to the 5 carbon atom of the sugar by a
diesteric bond. In the ribonucleic acid, RNA, thymine is substituted by uracil (U) and
the deoxyribose molecule is replaced by ribose.

Figure 1. The components of nucleotides (Picture: Andy Vierstraete, 1999)

Structure. Figure 2 shows how the nucleotides form a DNA chain. DNA is formed by
coupling the nucleotides between the phosphate group from a nucleotide (which is
positioned on the fifth C-atom of the sugar molecule) with the hydroxyl on the third C-
atom on the sugar molecule of the previous nucleotide. To accomplish this, a
diphosphate group is split off (with the release of energy). This means that new
nucleotides are always added on the 3' side of the chain. As shown in Figure 3, DNA
is double-stranded (except in some viruses), and the two strands pair with one
another in a very precise way. Each base in a strand will pair with only one kind of
base across from it in the opposing strand forming a base pair (bp): A is always
paired to T by two hydrogen bonds; and C is always paired to G by three hydrogen
bonds. In this way, the two chains are complementary to each other and one chain
can serve as a template for the production of the other.


Figure 2. Formation of a DNA chain from individual nucleotides (Picture: Andy
Vierstraete, 1999)

The bases form a hydrophobic nucleus inside the double helix. The sugars and
phosphate groups (in their anionic form) constitute the external hydrophilic layer of
the molecule. In physiological conditions, double-stranded DNA helix is more stable
than a single-stranded DNA helix.

Replication. DNA contains the complete genetic information that defines the
structure and function of an organism. Three different processes are responsible for
the transmission of genetic information:
replication;
transcription;
translation.
During replication a double-stranded nucleic acid is duplicated to give identical
copies. This process perpetuates the genetic information. During transcription, a
DNA segment that constitutes a gene is read and transcribed into a single-stranded
sequence of RNA. The RNA moves from the nucleus into the cytoplasm. Finally,

during translation, the RNA sequence is translated into a sequence of amino acids as
the protein is formed (Alberts et al., 1983).

Figure 3. Structure of DNA in a cell (Picture: Andy Vierstraete, 1999)


The replication of DNA is the process on which the PCR amplification is based, and
will be described in detail.
During replication, the DNA molecule unwinds, with each single strand becoming a
template for synthesis of a new, complementary strand. Each daughter molecule,
consisting of one old and one new DNA strand, is an exact copy of the parent
molecule.

Figure 4. The replication fork

Several enzymes are required to unwind the double helix and to synthesise a new
strand of DNA. Topoisomerase and helicase are responsible for the unwinding of the
DNA by breaking the supercoiled structure and nicking a single strand of DNA. Then,
primase (part of an aggregate of proteins called the primeosome) attaches a small
RNA primer to the single-stranded DNA, to act as a 3'OH end from which the DNA
polymerase begins synthesis. This RNA primer is eventually removed by RNase H
and the gap is filled in by DNA polymerase I. At this stage, DNA polymerase
proceeds along a single-stranded molecule of DNA, recruiting free dNTPs to
hydrogen bond with their appropriate complementary dNTP on the single strand (A
with T and G with C), forming a covalent phosphodiester bond with the previous
nucleotide of the same strand. The energy stored in the triphosphate is used to
covalently bind each new nucleotide to the growing second strand. There are
different forms of DNA polymerase but it is DNA polymerase III that is responsible for
the progressive synthesis of new DNA strands. DNA polymerase only acts from 5' to
3'. Since one strand of the double helix is 5' to 3' and the other one is 3' to 5', DNA
polymerase synthesises a second copy of the 5' to 3' strand (the lagging strand), in
spurts (Okazaki fragments) (Ogawa and Okazaki, 1980). The synthesis of the new

copies of the 5' to 3' strand is shown in Figure 4. The other strand, the leading strand,
can proceed with synthesis directly, from 5' to 3', as the helix unwinds. DNA
polymerase cannot start synthesising ex novo on a bare single strand but needs a
primer with a free 3'OH group onto which it can attach a dNTP.
Ligase catalyses the formation of a phosphodiester bond given an unattached but
adjacent 3'OH and 5'phosphate. This can fill in the unattached gap left when the RNA
primer is removed and filled in. It is worth noting that single-stranded binding proteins
are important to maintain the stability of the replication fork. Single-stranded DNA is
very labile, or unstable, so these proteins bind to it while it remains single-stranded,
protecting it from degradation.


Principles of PCR
PCR is based on the mechanism of DNA replication in vivo: dsDNA is unwound to
ssDNA, duplicated, and rewound. This technique consists of repetitive cycles of:
denaturation of the DNA through melting at elevated temperature to convert
double-stranded DNA to single-stranded DNA
annealing (hybridisation) of two oligonucleotides used as primers to the target
DNA
extension of the DNA chain by nucleotide addition from the primers using DNA
polymerase as catalyst in the presence of Mg
2+
ions.

The oligonucleotides typically consist of relatively short sequences, which are
different to each other and complementary to recognition sites flanking the segment
of target DNA to be amplified. The steps of template denaturation, primer annealing
and primer extension comprise a single "cycle" in the PCR amplification
methodology. Figure 5 illustrates the three major steps in a PCR amplification
process.

Figure 5. The steps of PCR amplification (Picture: Andy Vierstraete, 1999)

After each cycle, the newly synthesised DNA strands can serve as templates in the
next cycle. As shown in Figure 6, the major product of this exponential reaction is a

segment of dsDNA whose termini are defined by the 5' termini of the oligonucleotide
primers and whose length is defined by the distance between the primers. The
products of a successful first round of amplification are heterogeneously sized DNA
molecules, whose lengths may exceed the distance between the binding sites of the
two primers. In the second round, these molecules generate DNA strands of defined
length that will accumulate in an exponential fashion in later rounds of amplification
and will form the dominant products of the reaction. Thus, amplification, as a final
number of copies of the target sequence, is expressed by the following equation:
(2
n
-2n)x (1)
where n is the number of cycles, 2n is the first product obtained after the first cycle
and second products obtained after the second cycle with undefined length, x is the
number of copies of the original template. Potentially, after 20 cycles of PCR there
will be a 2
20
fold amplification, assuming 100% efficiency during each cycle. The
efficiency of a PCR will vary from template to template and according to the degree
of optimisation that has been carried out.
A detailed description of the three steps of PCR amplification (template denaturation,
primer annealing and extension) is given in the following paragraphs (Sambrook et
al., 1989).

Figure 6. The exponential amplification of DNA in PCR

Template denaturation

During denaturation, the double strand melts opening up to single-stranded DNA,
and all enzymatic reactions stop (i.e. the extension from a previous cycle). The two

complementary chains are separated by an increase in temperature. This is known
as denaturation. To obtain the denaturation of DNA, the temperature is usually
increased to ~ 93 - 96C. In this way the strong H-bonds are broken and the number
of non-paired bases increases. The reaction is complete when all of the dsDNA
becomes ssDNA. The temperature at which half of the dsDNA is single-stranded is
known as the melting temperature, T
m
. The type of solvent, the salt concentration
and the pH used, influence the denaturation process. For example, in low salt
concentrations, high pH and in the presence of organic solvents such as
formaldehyde, the melting temperature, T
m
, decreases. The concentration of G/C and
T/A can also affect the value of T
m
. The T
m
of the DNA structure containing an
elevated quantity of G/C is higher compared to that of DNA rich in T/A. For example,
Serratia marecescens has approximately 60% G/C with a T
m
of approximately 94C,
whereas Pneumococcus has approximately 40% G/C and a T
m
of approximately
85C.
Primer annealing
The annealing or rehybridisation of the DNA strands takes place at lower
temperature (usually 55 - 65C). Once the temperature is reduced, the two
complementary ssDNA chains will reform into a dsDNA molecule. In this phase, the
primers are flowing and hydrogen bonds are constantly formed and broken between
the single-stranded primer and the single-stranded template. The more stable bonds
last a bit longer (primers that exactly fit the template DNA) and on that small piece of
double-stranded DNA (template and primer), the polymerase can attach and begins
copying the template. Once there are a few bases built in, the ionic bond is so strong
between the template and the primer that it will not break.
Primer extension
In this step the primers are extended across the target sequence by using a heat-
stable DNA polymerase (frequently Taq DNA polymerase) in the presence of dNTPs
resulting in a duplication of the starting target material. The ideal working
temperature for the Taq DNA polymerase is 72C. When the primers have been
extended a few bases, they possess a stronger ionic attraction to the template, which
reduces the probability of the reverse process. Primers that do not match exactly
come loose again (because of the higher temperature) and do not give an extension
of the fragment. The bases (complementary to the template) are coupled to the
primer on the 3' side (the polymerase adds dNTPs from 5' to 3', reading the template
from 3' to 5'). The length of time of the primer extension steps can be increased if the

region of DNA to be amplified is long, however, for the majority of PCR experiments
an extension time of 1 min is sufficient to get a complete extension.
Instrumentation and components for the PCR
Instruments

Two major advances have allowed the PCR process to be automated:
a. The use of thermostable DNA polymerases, which resist inactivation at high
temperatures. Thus, an initial aliquot of polymerase could last throughout
numerous cycles of the protocol.
b. The development of temperature baths, which could shift their temperatures up
and down rapidly and in an automated, programmed manner. These are known
as thermal cyclers or PCR machines.
Several designs of temperature cycling devices have been used. For example:
heating and cooling by fluids, heating by electrical resistance and cooling by fluids
and heating by electric resistance and cooling by semiconductors. A typical
temperature cycling profile for a three-step protocol is shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7. PCR temperature cycling profile

The thermal cycling parameters such as denaturation, primer annealing and primer
extension already mentioned, as well as the components used and the cycle number
described in the following paragraphs, are critical for a successful PCR.


Target DNA

In principle, PCR amplification can be performed if at least one intact copy of the
target gene is present. A greater number of target copies enhance the probability of
successful DNA amplification. Any damage, such as a nick in the target DNA, will
block PCR amplification. The size of the target sequence can be anything from < 0.1
to a few kilobases. The total amount of DNA typically used for PCR is 0.05 to 1.0 g,
this allows detection of single copies of target sequence. Even if a sample does not
need to be highly purified, some contaminants such as heparin, heme, formalin,
Mg
2+
-chelating agents, as well as detergents should be eliminated to avoid inhibition
of the amplification process.

Primers

Generally, primers used are 16 - 30 nucleotides in length that allows the use of a
reasonably high annealing temperature. Primers should avoid stretches of polybase
sequences (e.g. poly dG) or repeating motifs - these can hybridise inappropriately on
the template. Inverted repeat sequences should be avoided so as to prevent
formation of secondary structure in the primer, which would prevent hybridisation to
template. Sequences complementary to other primers used in the PCR should also
be avoided so to prevent hybridisation between primers, or primer dimer formation
(particularly important for the 3' end of the primer). If possible, the 3' end of the
primer should be rich in G, C bases to enhance annealing of the end that will be
extended. The distance between primers should be less than 10 Kb in length.
Typically, substantial reduction in yield is observed when the primers extend from
each other beyond ~3 Kb. Oligonucleotides are usually used at the concentration of
1M in PCR. This is sufficient for at least 30 cycles of amplification. The presence of
higher concentration of oligonucleotides can cause amplification of undesirable non-
target sequences. Conversely, the PCR is inefficient with limiting primer
concentration.

DNA polymerase

The original method of PCR used the Klenow fragment of E. coli DNA polymerase I
(Saiki et al., 1985). This enzyme, however, denatures at temperatures lower than that
required to denature most template duplexes. Thus, in earlier experiments, fresh
enzyme had to be added to the reaction after each cycle. In addition, samples had to

be moved from one temperature bath to another to allow the individual steps of
denaturation, annealing and polymerisation. The use of heat-resistant DNA
polymerase has obviously facilitated the process because the addition of enzymes
after every denaturation step is no longer necessary. Typically, DNA polymerases
can only incorporate nucleotides from the 3 end of a polynucleotide. The first
thermostable DNA polymerase used was the Taq DNA polymerase isolated from the
bacterium Thermus aquaticus (Saiki et al., 1988). Even though this enzyme is
probably the most widely used in PCR applications, several other DNA polymerases
are commercially available. Table 1 lists the properties of some thermostable DNA
polymerases currently in use for PCR (Newton and Graham, 1994).

Table 1. Characteristics of some DNA polymerases used for PCR

Taq/
AmpliTaq
Vent
Deep-
Vent
Pfu Tth UITma
Source
Thermus
aquaticus
Thermo-
coccus
litoralis
Pyrococcus
GB-D
Pyrococcus
furiosus
Thermus
thermophilus
Thermotoga
maritima

Application
Taq: natural
AmpliTaq:
for genetic
engineering
For genetic
engineering
For genetic
engineering
Natural
For genetic
engineering
For genetic
engineering
T

of activity
at 95 C (min)
40 1380 400 >120 20 >50
a

5 to 3
Exonuclease
activity

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

No
3 to 5
Exonuclease
activity

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes
Processivity 50-60 ? 7 ? 30-40 ?
Extension
rate (nt/s)
75 ? >80 60 >33 ?
Resulting
DNA ends
3A >95% blunt >95% blunt ? 3A blunt
MW in kDa 94 ? ? 92 94 70

Taq/AmpliTaq DNA polymerase. As already mentioned, this enzyme was isolated
from the bacterium Thermus aquaticus living in a hot spring in Yellowstone National
Park USA at temperatures close to 85C. The optimal working temperature of this
enzyme is 70 - 80C. At this temperature, the bacterium synthesises DNA at a rate of
35 - 100 nucleotides/sec. The average number of nucleotides, which an enzyme
incorporates into DNA before detaching itself from the template, is known as the
processivity. AmpliTaq DNA polymerase is a genetically modified enzyme

expressed by E. coli. Since AmpliTaq is recombinant, the purity and reproducibility
of this enzyme are higher than those of the wild type. However, potential
contamination might occur during the DNA amplification, with some homologous E.
coli sequences. In this case, the use of a DNA polymerase which has not been
expressed with E. coli, as host organism, is recommended. Both Taq, and
AmpliTaq DNA polymerases possess a 5 to 3 exonuclease activity, which removes
nucleotides ahead of the growing chain.

Vent -; DeepVent-; Pfu- and UITma- DNA polymerases. These enzymes
have a 3- 5 exonuclease activity which allow the removal of mismatched residues
until a correctly base-paired terminus is generated. However, the 3- 5 exonuclease
activity can cause degradation of the primers. Therefore, the enzyme should only be
added after the reaction has started, or alternatively, chemically modified primers
should be used.

AmpliTaqGold- DNA polymerase. This enzyme consists of an AmpliTaq DNA
polymerase, inactive at room temperature, and can only be activated during an
incubation period at 94C. In this case, the program of the thermocycler should
include a pre-incubation period at a temperature of 92 - 95C. For the time-released
PCR, the pre-incubation can be eliminated, but at least 10 cycles more than the
classic PCR must be performed.

Reaction buffers and MgCl
2
in PCR reactions

In addition to the reagents directly involved in the reaction, PCR requires a suitable
buffer. Buffer composition depends on the type and characteristics of the enzyme
being used and most suppliers usually provide a 10x buffer for use with the
respective enzyme. The most common reaction buffer used with Taq/AmpliTaq
DNA polymerase contains:
10 mM Tris, pH 8.3
50 mM KCl
1.5-2.5 mM MgCl
2


The presence of divalent cations in PCR is critical. The MgCl
2
concentration in the
final reaction mixture is usually between 0.5 to 5.0 mM, and the optimum
concentration is determined empirically (Innis and Gelfand, 1990).
Mg
2+
ions:
form a soluble complex with dNTPs which is essential for dNTP incorporation,
stimulate polymerase activity,
increase the T
m
of primer/template interaction (and therefore they stabilise the
duplex interaction).
Generally, a low Mg
2+
concentration leads to low yields (or no yield) whereas a high
Mg
2+
concentration leads to accumulation of non-specific products (mispriming). It is
important to avoid a high concentration of chelating agents such as EDTA or
negatively charged ionic groups such as phosphate in the template DNA solution.
Current literature includes discussions on various PCR buffers and supplements,
such as DMSO, PEG 6000, formamide, glycerol, spermidine and non-ionic
detergents, used to increase the reaction specificity or efficiency (Roux, 1995).
Certain DNA polymerases will indeed reach their optimum level of activity (Rolfs et
al., 1992) only in the presence of such supplements.

Deoxyribonucleoside triphosphates

Free deoxyribonucleoside triphosphates (dNTPs) are required for DNA synthesis.
The dNTPs concentrations for PCR should be 20 to 200 M for each dNTP and the
four dNTPs should be used at equivalent concentrations to minimize
misincorporation errors (Innis et al., 1988). High-purity dNTPs are supplied by
several manufacturers either as four individual stocks or as a mixture of all four
dNTPs. dNTPs stock solutions (usually 100 mM) should be adjusted to pH 7.0-7.5
with 1 M NaOH to ensure that the pH of the final reaction does not fall below 7.1
(Sambrook et al., 1989); however, many dNTPs stock solutions are now supplied
with already adjusted pH.

Cycle number and plateau effect

The number of amplification cycles necessary to produce a band visible on a gel
depends largely on the starting concentration of the target DNA. In order to amplify
50 target molecules, 40 - 45 cycles are recommended, whereas 25 - 30 cycles are

enough to amplify 3x10
5
molecules to the same concentration (Innis and Gelfand,
1990). This non-proportionality is due to the so-called plateau effect, which is the
attenuation in the exponential rate of product accumulation in late stages of a PCR,
when the product reaches 0.3 - 1.0 nM. This may be caused by degradation of
reactants (dNTPs, enzyme), reactant depletion (primers, dNTPs the former a
problem with short products, the latter with long products), end-product inhibition
(pyrophosphate formation), competition for reactants by non-specific products,
competition for primer binding by re-annealing of the concentrated (10 nM) product
(Innis and Gelfand, 1990). If the desired product is not obtained in 30 cycles, a small
sample (1 l) of the amplified product should be taken, mixed and re-amplified 20 -
30 cycles in a new reaction mix, rather than extending the run to more cycles. In
some cases where the template concentration is limiting, this re-amplification can
produce a good product, whereas extension of cycling to 40 times or more does not.

Design of primers for PCR
Perhaps the most critical parameter for successful PCR is the design of primers. All
things being equal, a poorly designed primer can result in a PCR reaction that will not
work. The primer sequence determines several things such as the position and
length of the product, its melting temperature and ultimately the yield (Innis and
Gelfand, 1994). A poorly designed primer can result in little or no product due to non-
specific amplification and/or primer-dimer formation, which can become competitive
enough to suppress product formation. This application note is provided to give rules
that should be taken into account when designing primers for PCR. More
comprehensive coverage of this subject can be found elsewhere (Dieffenbach et al.,
1995).

Primer selection

Several variables must be taken into account when designing PCR primers. Among
the most critical are:
Primer length
Melting temperature (T
m
)
Specificity
Complementary primer sequences

G/C content and polypyrimidine (T, C) or polypurine (A, G) stretches
3-end sequence
Each of these critical elements will be discussed in the following sections.

Primer length

Since specificity, temperature and time of annealing partly depend on primer length,
this parameter is critical for successful PCR. In general, oligonucleotides between 18
and 24 bases are extremely sequence-specific, provided that the annealing
temperature is optimal. Primer length is also proportional to annealing efficiency. In
general, the longer is the primer, the more inefficient the annealing. With fewer
templates primed at each step, this can result in a significant decrease in amplified
product. The primers should, however, not be too short unless the application
specifically requires it. As discussed below, the goal should be to design a primer
with an annealing temperature of at least 50C.
The relationship between annealing temperature and melting temperature is one of
the Black Boxes of PCR. A general rule-of-thumb is to use an annealing
temperature that is 5C lower than the melting temperature. Often, the annealing
temperature determined in this fashion will not be optimal and empirical experiments
will have to be performed to determine the optimal temperature. This is most easily
accomplished using a gradient thermal cycler.

Melting temperature (T
m
)

It is important to keep in mind that there are two primers added to a site/target
directed PCR reaction. Both of the oligonucleotide primers should be designed so
that they have similar melting temperatures. If primers are mismatched in terms of
T
m
, amplification will be less efficient or may not work at all since the primer with the
higher T
m
will misprime at lower temperatures and the primer with the lower T
m
may
not work at higher temperatures. The melting temperatures of oligos are most
accurately calculated using nearest neighbour thermodynamic calculations with the
formula:

T
m
primer
= H [S+ R ln (c/4)] -273.15C + 16.6 log
10
[K
+
] (2)


where H is the enthalpy and S is the entropy for helix formation, R is the molar gas
constant and c is the concentration of primers.
This is most easily accomplished by using primer design software packages already
available on the market (Sharrocks, 1994). Fortunately, a good working
approximation of this value (generally valid for oligos in the 18 - 24 base range) can
be calculated using the formula:

T
m
= 2(A+T) + 4(G+C) (3)

where A, T, G, C are the purinic and pyrimidinic bases.
Table 2 shows calculated values for primers of various lengths using this equation
(known as the Wallace formula) and assuming 50% GC content (Suggs et al., 1981).

Table 2. Calculation of the Tm of the primers with Wallaces equation

Primer length

T
m
= 2 (A+T) + 4(G+C)

Primer length

T
m
= 2 (A+T) + 4(G+C)
4 12C 22 66C
6 18C 24 72C
8 24C 26 78C
10 30C 28 84C
12 36C 30 90C
14 42C 32 96C
16 48C 34 102C
18 54C 36 108C
20 66C 38 114C

The temperatures calculated using Wallace's rule are inaccurate at the extremes of
this chart. When calculating the melting temperatures of the primers, care must be
taken to ensure that the melting temperature of the product is low enough to obtain
100% melting at 92C. This parameter will help to assure a more efficient PCR, but is
not always necessary for successful PCR. In general, products between 100 - 600
base pairs are efficiently amplified in many PCR reactions. If there is doubt, the
product T
m
can be calculated using the formula:


T
m
=81.5 + 16.6 (log
10
[K+] + 0.41 (%G+C)-675/length (4)

Specificity

As mentioned above, primer specificity is at least partly dependent on primer length.
It is evident that there are many more unique 24 base oligos than there are 15 base
oligos. That said, primers must be chosen so that they have a unique sequence
within the template DNA that is to be amplified. A primer designed with a highly
repetitive sequence will result in a smear when amplifying genomic DNA. However,
the same primer may give a single band, if a single clone from a genomic library is
amplified. Because Taq DNA polymerase is active over a broad range of
temperatures, primer extension will occur at the lower temperatures of annealing. If
the temperature is too low, non-specific priming may occur, which can be extended
by the polymerase if there is a short homology at the 3' end. In general, a melting
temperature of 55 - 72C gives the best results (note that this corresponds to a
primer length of 18 - 24 bases using Wallace's rule).

Complementary primer sequences

Primers need to be designed with absolutely no intra-primer homology beyond 3
base pairs. If a primer has such a region of self-homology, snap back, or hair-pin,
partially double-stranded structures can occur, which will interfere with annealing to
the template. Another related danger is inter-primer homology. Partial homology in
the middle regions of two primers can interfere with hybridisation. If the homology
occurs at the 3' end of either primer, primer dimer formation will occur, which, more
often than not, will prevent the formation of the desired product via competition.

G/C content and polypyrimidine (T, C) or polypurine (A, G) stretches

The base composition of primers should be between 45% and 55% GC. The primer
sequence must be chosen so that there is no poly-G or poly-C stretches that can
promote non-specific annealing. Poly-A and poly-T stretches are also to be avoided,
as these will breathe and open up stretches of the primer-template complex. This
can lower the efficiency of amplification. Polypyrimidine (T, C) and polypurine (A, G)

stretches should also be avoided. Ideally the primer will have a near random mix of
nucleotides, a 50% GC content and be ~20 bases long. This will put the T
m
in the
range of 56 - 62C (Dieffenbach et al., 1995).

3-end sequence

It is well established that the 3' terminal position in PCR primers is essential for the
control of mis-priming. The problem of primer homologies occurring in these regions
has already been explored. Another variable to look at is the inclusion of a G or C
residue at the 3' end of primers. This GC Clamp helps to ensure correct binding at
the 3' end, due to the stronger hydrogen bonding of G/C residues. This also helps to
improve the efficiency of the reaction by minimising any breathing that might occur.

Specialised PCR
In addition to the amplification of a target DNA sequence by the typical PCR
procedures already described, several specialised types of PCR have been
developed for specific applications.

Nested PCR

Nested sets of primers can be used to improve PCR yield of the target DNA
sequence (Newton and Graham, 1994). PCR with nested primers is performed for 15
to 30 cycles with one primer set and then for an additional 15 to 30 cycles, with a
second primer set, for an internal region of the first amplified DNA product. Thus, the
larger fragment produced by the first round of PCR is used as the template for the
second PCR. Using the nested PCR method can dramatically increase the sensitivity
and specificity of DNA amplification. The specificity is particularly enhanced because
this technique almost always eliminates any spurious non-specific amplification
products. This is because after the first round of PCR any non-specific products are
unlikely to be sufficiently complementary to the nested primers to be able to serve as
a template for further amplification, thus the desired target sequence is preferentially
amplified. However, the increased risk of contamination is a drawback of this extreme

sensitivity, and great care must be taken when performing such PCRs, particularly in
a diagnostic laboratory.

Multiplex PCR

Whereas standard PCR usually uses one pair of primers to amplify a specific
sequence, Multiplex PCR uses multiple pairs of primers to amplify many sequences
simultaneously. The presence of many PCR primers in a single tube could cause
many problems, such as the increased formation of misprimed PCR products,
"primer dimers", and the amplification discrimination of longer DNA fragments (Atlas
and Bey, 1994).
For this type of PCR amplification, primers are chosen with similar annealing
temperatures. The lengths of amplified products should be similar; large differences
in the lengths of the target DNAs will favour the amplification of the shorter target
over the longer one, resulting in differential yields of amplified products. In addition,
Multiplex PCR buffers contain Taq polymerase additive, which decreases the
competition among amplicons and the discrimination of longer DNA fragments during
Multiplex PCR.
Multiplex PCR products can be further hybridised with a gene-specific probe for
verification.

PCR in practice
As already illustrated in the previous sections, PCR is widely used and is a powerful
analytical and preparative technique. However, because of the nature of this
procedure, trace amounts of DNA contaminants could serve as templates, resulting
in amplification of the wrong target nucleic acid (false positives). Thus, it is critical to
perform PCR amplification in a DNA-free environment. Providing physically separate
working areas with dedicated equipment reduces the risk of contamination. Strict
compliance with decontamination requirements (decontamination of nucleic acids,
prevention of aerosols etc.) is the most important prerequisite to reduce the rate of
false-positive results to a minimum. PCR contamination can be caused by several
sources such as:
Laboratory benches, equipment and pipetting devices, which can be
contaminated by previous DNA preparations, or by purified restriction fragments
Cross-contamination between samples
Products from previous PCR amplifications.
This section provides some recommendations, with the aim of defining the routine
requirements for the establishment and maintenance of a clean environment for any
PCR-based assay system, regardless of the number of samples being processed
(Roth et al., 1997).

Physical prevention methods

Laboratory facilities. In order to avoid contamination, physically separate working
areas should be set up as follows:
1. Sample preparation area
This room consists of an area where all the steps prior to amplification of the
template DNA are performed (e.g. isolation and purification of DNA).
2. PCR set-up room
This clean room is devoted to the procedures related to the preparation of the
PCR reaction (e.g. mastermix, primers dilutions etc.).
3. Post-PCR area
The area is dedicated to the amplification of the target DNA sequence, and the
detection and analysis of the PCR products.
In addition, the following general rules should be observed:

All the rooms should contain dedicated equipment (coats, gloves, reagents and
supplies).
Reagents and other devices must be labelled with content and date of
preparation.
Use a one-way flow system, i.e. never move material, samples or equipment from
post-PCR areas into pre-PCR locations.
Use disposable PCR reaction tubes, which are DNase and RNase free.
Use special aerosol-resistant pipette tips and a dedicated (used only for PCR) set
of pipettes, preferably positive displacement pipettes.
If possible, set up PCR reactions under a fume hood that is equipped with UV
light. Under the fume hood, store a microcentrifuge and disposable gloves that
are used only for PCR.
Periodically wash benches and shelves with 10% bleach followed by 70%
ethanol.

Sample handling

Use sterile techniques and always wear fresh gloves when working in the areas
previously described. Change gloves frequently, especially if you suspect they
have become contaminated with solutions containing template DNA.
Always use new and/or sterilised glassware, plasticware and pipettes to prepare
PCR reagents and template DNA.
Autoclave all reagents and solutions that can be autoclaved without affecting their
performance. Of course, primers, dNTPs and Taq DNA Polymerase should not
be autoclaved.
Have your own set of PCR reagents and solutions that are only used for PCR,
and store these reagents in small aliquots.
When pipetting DNA, avoid creating aerosols that can carry contaminants.
Always include control reactions, for example a negative (no DNA) control,
which contains all reaction components except the template DNA, and a positive
control that has been successfully used in previous PCRs.


Biochemical prevention methods

Uracil-DNA Glycosylase. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) can amplify a single
molecule over a billionfold. Thus, even minuscule amounts of a contaminant can be
amplified and lead to a false positive result. Such contaminants are often products
from previous PCR amplifications (carry-over contamination). Therefore, methods to
avoid such contamination have been developed.
One common strategy is substituting dUTP for dTTP during PCR amplification, to
produce uracil-containing DNA (U-DNA) (Longo et al., 1990). Treating subsequent
PCR reaction mixtures with Uracil-DNA Glycosylase (UNG) prior to PCR
amplification and subsequent cleavage of pyrimidinic polynucleotides at elevated
temperature (95C) under alkaline conditions (during the initial denaturation step) will
remove contaminating U-DNA from the sample (see Figure 8).

Figure 8. Uracil-DNA Glycosylase reaction

This method, of course, requires that all PCR-reactions in the lab have to be carried
out with dUTP instead of dTTP.
Note the following when using dU-containing PCR products in downstream
applications:
PCR products containing dU perform as well as those containing dT when used
as hybridisation targets or as templates for dideoxy sequencing.
PCR products containing dU can be cloned directly, if they are transformed into
UNGbacterial hosts.

A dU-containing substrate is readily digested by some common restriction
enzymes (e.g. EcoR I and BamH I), while others show reduced activity (e.g. Hpa
I, Hind II, Hind III) on these substrates.
The use of dU-containing DNA is not recommended for protein-binding or DNA-
protein interaction studies.

DNase I, exonuclease III. Other biochemical methods are based on the treatment of
the contaminated DNA with DNase I, exonuclease III or with a restriction enzyme,
containing a recognition sequence within the target DNA. However, because of the
harsh reaction condition required, these enzymes present the disadvantage of
reducing the efficiency of the PCR amplification.

Preparation of the mixture for the PCR reaction (Mastermix)

The essential reagent components for PCR are water, the reaction buffer, a
thermostable DNA polymerase, oligonucleotide primers, deoxynucleotides (dNTPs),
template (target) DNA, and magnesium ions (Mg
2+
). In general, all reagents (except
the template DNA) are mixed in a single tube, in enough volume according to the
number of reactions to be performed (mastermix). The mastermix is then aliquotted
into individual tubes and the template DNA is added. The use of a mastermix solution
reduces the risk of contamination and improves the performance of the PCR reaction
for the following reasons:
a uniformed quality of the solution is guaranteed for all the reagents for a series
of analyses,
the risk of contamination of the parent and resulting solutions is decreased,
larger volumes can be pipetted,
there are fewer pipetting stages and therefore time is saved.
Successful amplification of the region of interest depends on the amount and quality
of the template DNA. The amount of template required is dependent upon the
complexity of the DNA sample. Taking into account that the size of nuclear genome
varies among organisms, the DNA concentration should be maintained constant
(usually 10 ng/l). A comparison of genome size of plant species frequently used in
plant transformation and the corresponding number of genome copies in a defined
amount of DNA, are given in Table 3.


Table 3. Comparison of genome size of some plant species and corresponding
genome copies in defined amount of DNA

Sample Genome size Genome copies in
1 g DNA
Genome copies in
1 ng DNA
Maize 5 x 10
9
bp 1.85 x 10
5
185
Soybean 1.55 x 10
9
bp 5.98 x 10
5
598
Tobacco 3.8 x 10
9
bp 2.43 x 10
5
245
Rice 4 x 10
8
bp 2.31 x 10
6
2310

For example, in a 4 kb plasmid containing a 1 kb insert, 25% of the input DNA is the
target of interest. Conversely, a 1 kb gene in the maize genome (5 x 10
9
bp)
represents approximately 0.00002% of the input DNA. Approximately 1,000,000-fold
more maize genomic DNA is required to maintain the same number of target copies
per reaction. For optimised results, > 104 copies of the target sequence should be
used as a starting template to obtain a signal in 25 - 30 cycles. Even if in practice
less than 10 copies of a target sequence can be amplified, in this case more PCR
cycles might be required to detect a signal by gel electrophoresis. General protocols
routinely applied consider a number of cycles ranging between 30 and 40. Care
should be taken in further increasing the number of cycles, since this may increase
non-specific amplification.

Controls

As reported in the previous section, potential sources of contamination can be found
throughout the laboratory. Samples, laboratory staff, air conditioning, equipment and
reagents can all be a source of contamination. Among contaminant agents, the
following can be reported:
1. Carry-over contamination of amplified target DNA from previous PCRs
2. Cross-contamination between samples, resulting in transfer of target DNA from
one sample to another
3. Genomic DNA from past sample preparation
4. Degrading products from decontamination reactions
Whereas the first three forms of contamination produce false positives the latter type
causes false negatives. This form of contamination, first observed by Niederhauser
and co-workers in 1994, produces the inhibition of PCR reactions (Niederhauser et

al., 1994). In fact, decontamination using the UNG method, favours the formation of
complexes with the primers.
In order to obtain reliable results, both positive and negative controls must always be
used during a PCR reaction. Table 4 indicates some of the most common controls
used to ensure the performance of nucleic acid amplification procedures.

Table 4. Controls to be inserted within the PCR based tests

Control Method
Contamination of the reagents with the
target DNA
PCR without DNA template (only mastermix)
negative control
Specificity of the reaction Controls to find secondary and non-specific
products
Development and sensitivity of the
reaction
Positive/negative controls to verify that the
desired conditions and yields are fulfilled
Integrity of the PCR mixture PCR with a DNA positive control

Positive controls

The efficiency of the DNA extraction and its amplification has to be checked by
positive controls. Ideally, limits of detection should be given as genomic equivalents,
which would allow the production of defined sensitivity controls, with small copy
numbers. As a rule, a reference preparation, containing a known concentration of the
target DNA under investigation, should be available.

Negative controls

Contamination (carry-over of amplified products or nucleic acids) may occur during
the isolation and purification of the target DNA, as well as during the preparation of
the amplification reaction mixture. Insertion of a negative control with the
amplification reaction mixture is therefore required.


References
Alberts, B., Bray, D., Lewis, J., Raff, M., Roberts, K. and Watson, J.D. (1983).
Molecular biology of the cell. Garland Publishing, Inc., New York.

Atlas, R.M. and Bej, A.K. (1994). Polymerase Chain Reaction. In: Gerhardt, P.,
Murrey, R.G.E., Wood, W.A. and Krieg, N.R., (Eds.) Methods for general and
molecular bacteriology. Washington, D.C.: American Society for Microbiology, pp.
418435.

Dieffenbach, C.W., Lowe, T.M.J. and Dveksler, G.S. (1995). General Concepts for
PCR Primer Design. In: Dieffenbach, C.W, and Dveksler, G.S. (Eds.) PCR
Primer: a Laboratory Manual. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press,
Cold Spring Harbor, NY, USA, pp. 133155.

Innis, M.A. and Gelfand, D.H. (1990). Optimization of PCRs. In: Innis, M.A., Gelfand,
D.H., Sninsky, J.J., and White, T.J. (Eds.) PCR Protocols: a Guide to Methods
and Applications. New York: Academic Press, pp. 312.

Innis, M.A., and Gelfand, D.H. (1994). Optimization of PCRs. In: Innis, M.A., Gelfand,
D.H., Sninsky, J.J., and White, T.J. (Eds.) PCR Protocols: a Guide to Methods
and Applications. London: CRC Press, pp. 511.

Innis, M.A., Myambo, K.B., Gelfand, D.H. and Brow, M.A. (1988). DNA sequencing
with Thermus aquaticus DNA polymerase and direct sequencing of polymerase
chain reaction-amplified DNA. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science
USA 85, 9436-9440.

Longo, M.C., Berninger, M.S. and Hartley, J.L. (1990). Use of uracil DNA glycosylase
to control carry-over contamination in polymerase chain reaction. Gene 93, 125
128.

Newton, C.R. and Graham, A. (1994). PCR. BIOS Scientific Publishers, Limited,
Oxford.


Niederhauser, C., Hfelein, C., Wegmller, B., Lthy, J. and Candrian, U. (1994).
Reliability of PCR Decontamination Systems. PCR Methods and Applications 4,
117123.

Ogawa, T. and Okazaki, T. (1980). Discontinuous DNA replication. Annual Review of
Biochemistry 49, 421457.

Roux, K.H. (1995). Optimization and troubleshooting in PCR. PCR Methods and
Applications 4, 185-194.

Rolfs, A., Schuller, I., Finckh, U. and Weber-Rolfs, I. (1992). Substances affecting
PCR: Inhibition and enhancement, 51-58. In: PCR: Clinical diagnostics and
research, Springer.

Roth, A., Mauch, H. and Gbel, U. (1997). Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques
Recommendations for Employing Molecular Methods in Diagnostic Routine
Microbiology Laboratories and Measures for Internal Quality Assurance. Gustav
Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart.

Saiki, R.K., Scharf, S.J., Faloona, F., Mullis, K.B., Horn, G.T., Erlich, H.A. and
Arnheim, N. (1985). Enzymatic amplification of -globin genomic sequences and
restriction site analysis for diagnosis of sickle cell anemia. Science 230, 1350.

Saiki, R.K. et al. (1988). Primer-directed enzymatic amplification of DNA with a
thermostable DNA polymerase. Science 239, 487.

Sambrook, J., Fritsch, E.F. and Maniatis, T. (1989). In vitro Amplification of DNA by
the Polymerase Chain Reaction. In: Sambrook, J., Fritsch, E.F. and Maniatis, T.
(Eds.) Molecular Cloning: a Laboratory Manual. New York: Cold Spring Harbor
Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, USA, chapter 14.

Sharrocks, A.D. (1994). The design of primers for PCR. In: Griffin, H.G. and Griffin,
A.M (Eds.) PCR Technology: Current Innovations. London: CRC Press, pp. 511.


Suggs, S.V., Hirose, T., Miyake, E.H., Kawashima, M.J., Johnson, K.I., and Wallace,
R.B. (1981). Using Purified Genes. In ICN-UCLA Symp. Developmental Biology,
Vol. 23, Brown, D.D. Ed., Academic Press, New York, 1981, 683.

Additional Reading
Gayer-Herkert, G., (1992). Molekularbiologische Methoden fr den Nachweis von
Mikroorganismen in Mischpopulationen eine Literaturstudie. Bioengineering 5 +
6, 5564.

Horton, H., Moran, L., Ochs, R., Rawn, J. and Scrimgeour, K., (1994). Principes de
Biochimie. De Boeck Wesmael, S.A., Bruxelles.

Knippers, R. (1995). Molekulare Genetik. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart.

Kwok, S., Kellog, D.E., McKinney, N., Spasic, D., Goda, L., Levenson, C. and
Sninsky, J.J. (1990). Effects of primer-template mismatches on the polymerase
chain reaction: Human Immunodeficiency Virus 1 model studies. Nucleic Acids
Research 18, 9991005.

Larzul, D. (1993). Le PCR: un procd de rplication in vitro. Tec & Doc-Lavoisier,
Paris.

Stryer, L. (1991). Biochemie. Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, GmbH, Heidelberg.

Watson, D.J., Hopkins, N., Roberts, J., Steitz, J. and Weiner, A. (1988). Molecular
Biology of the Gene. The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., New
York.





Session 7

Characteristics of Roundup Ready Soybean,
MON810 Maize, and Bt-176 Maize


Characteristics of Roundup Ready Soybean, MON810 Maize, and Bt-176 Maize 2


Table of Contents

Session 7

Characteristics of Roundup Ready Soybean, MON810 Maize, and
Bt-176 Maize

Characteristics of Roundup Ready soybean 3
Characteristics of maize MON810 7
Characteristics of maize Bt-176 11

References 16


Characteristics of Roundup Ready soybean
1

Brief identification

Designation GTS 40-3-2
Applicant Monsanto Canada Inc.
Plant Species Glycine max L. (soybean)
Novel Traits Novel tolerance to glyphosate, the active
ingredient of Roundup herbicide
Trait Introduction Method Particle acceleration (biolistics)
Proposed Use Production of soybeans for animal feed
(mostly defatted toasted meal and flakes)
and human consumption (mostly oil,
protein fractions and dietary fibre).

Background information
Soybean line GTS 40-3-2 was developed by Monsanto Canada Inc. to allow the use
of glyphosate as an alternative weed control system in soybean production.
The development of GTS 40-3-2 was based on recombinant DNA technology,
through the introduction of a glyphosate tolerant form of the enzyme 5-
enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) gene, isolated from
Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain CP4, into the commercial soybean variety "A5403"
(Asgrow Seed Company).

Description of the novel trait
Glyphosate tolerance
Glyphosate, the active ingredient of Roundup, is a systemic, post emergent
herbicide used worldwide as a non-selective weed control agent. Glyphosate acts as
a competitive inhibitor of 5-enol-pyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS), an
essential enzyme of the shikimate biochemical pathway involved in the production of
the aromatic aminoacids phenylalanine, tyrosine and tryptophan (Figure 1). The
inhibition of EPSPS results in growth suppression and plant death.
The inserted glyphosate tolerance gene codes for a bacterial version (derived from
the CP4 strain of Agrobacterium tumefaciens) of this essential enzyme, ubiquitous in

1
Extracted from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Decision Document DD95-05.

plants, fungi and microorganisms and is highly insensitive to glyphosate. It can
therefore fulfil the aromatic aminoacid metabolic needs of the plant.
The EPSPS gene is under the regulation of a strong constitutive promoter from
Cauliflower Mosaic Virus (P- CaMV E35S) and terminates with the nopaline synthase
terminator (T-nos) derived from Agrobacterium tumefaciens (Figure 2). A plant-
derived DNA sequence coding for a chloroplast transit peptide (CTP4 from Petunia
hibrida) was cloned at the 5 of the glyphosate tolerance gene. The signal peptide
fused to the EPSPS gene facilitates the import of newly translated enzyme into the
chloroplasts, where both the shikimate pathway and glyphosate sites of action are
located. Once importation has occurred, the transit peptide is removed and rapidly
degraded by a specific protease.
EPSP synthase is ubiquitous in nature and is not expected to be toxic or allergenic.
When subjected to comparative analyses with sequence databases of toxic or
allergenic polypeptides, the amino acid sequence of the enzyme showed no
significant homology with any known toxin or allergen.

phosphoenolpyruvate + eritrose-4-phosphate
shikimate-3-phosphate
phosphoenolpyruvate
phenylalanine tyrosine tryptophan
Glyphosate (Roundup)
N-(phosphonometyl) glycin
5-enolpyruvil-shikimate-3-phosphate
Figure 1
EPSPS catalyses the reaction
of shikimate-3-phosphate and
phosphoenolpyruvate (PEP) to
form 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-
phosphate (EPSP) and
phosphate. EPSP is an
intermediate for aromatic
aminoacids synthesis. As a
consequence of inhibition of this
biochemical pathway, proteins
synthesis is disrupted, resulting
in plant death.
EPSPS is the only physiological
target of glyphosate in plants,
and no other PEP-utilising
enzymes are inhibited by
glyphosate.


Figure 2. Schematic representation of the Roundup Ready soybean gene cassette
(modified from Padgette et al. 1995).

Development method
The commercial soybean variety A5403 (Asgrow Seed Co.) was transformed by
means of gold particle bombardment, with the PV-GMGT04 plasmid vector harvested
from Escherichia coli (see Figure 3). The PV-GMGT04 plasmid contained the CP4
EPSPS gene coding for glyphosate tolerance, the gus gene for production of -
glucuronidase as a selectable marker, and the nptII gene for antibiotic resistance
(kanamycin). The original transformant selected showed two sites of integration, one
with the gus selectable marker and the other with the glyphosate tolerance gene.
These two sites subsequently segregated independently in the following sexual
generation, and line GTS 40-3-2, upon analysis, was found to contain just one
insertion site, in which only the glyphosate tolerance gene is integrated.

Figure 3. Plasmid map including genetic elements of vector PV-GMGT04 used in the
transformation of RR soybean event 40-3-2 (taken from Monsanto, 2000)

CTP4 P-E35S CP4 EPSPS T-nos

Stability of insertion of the introduced traits
The original data (Padgette et al., 1995, 1996) indicated that GTS 40-3-2 contained a
single functional CP4 EPSPS gene cassette, consisting of the Cauliflower Mosaic
Virus (CaMV) E35S promoter, a chloroplast transit peptide, the CP4 EPSPS coding
sequence, and the nos polyadenylation signal.
No incorporation of any coding region from outside the fusion gene of the original
plasmid vector was found. Subsequent generations demonstrated no further
segregation of the fusion gene described above, showing that line GTS 40-3-2 was
homozygous for the fusion gene. DNA analyses over six generations showed that the
insertion was stable.
More recent characterisation studies have shown that, during integration of the insert
DNA several rearrangements occurred and that, in addition to the primary functional
insert, Roundup Ready soybean event 40-3-2 contains two small not functional
segments of inserted DNA of 250 bp and 72 bp, respectively (Monsanto, 2000;
Windels et al., 2001)

Regulatory decision
Roundup Ready (RR) soybean is, at present, the only transgenic soybean line
approved for marketing in the EU. After clearance in the US in 1994, consent for
importation into the European Union was also given with Commission Decision
96/281/EC of 3 April 1996 (Commission Decision 96/281/EC). This decision allows
for the importation of seed into the EU for industrial processing into non-viable
products including animal feeds, food and any other products in which soybean
fractions are used, only.


Characteristics of maize MON810
2


Designation Event MON810 maize (trade name
YieldGard)
Applicant Monsanto Canada Inc.
Plant Species Zea mays L. (maize)
Novel Traits Resistance to European Corn Borer
(Ostrinia nubilalis)
Trait Introduction Method Particle acceleration (biolistics)
Proposed Use Production of Z. mays for human
consumption (wet or dry mill or seed oil),
and meal and silage for livestock feed.

Maize event MON810 (YieldGard) was developed by Monsanto Canada Inc. to be
specifically resistant to European Corn Borer (ECB; Ostrinia nubilalis) and to provide
a method to control yield losses due to damage through insect feeding caused by the
ECB in its larval stages, without the use of conventional pesticides.
MON810 was developed using recombinant DNA technology and microprojectile
bombardment of plant cells, to introduce a gene encoding the production of a
naturally occurring insecticidal protein (derived from Bacillus thuringiensis ssp.
kurstaki). This protein is active against certain species of Lepidoptera, the insect
order to which butterflies and moths belong, including ECB. More specifically, the
protein expressed in MON810 is a truncated form of the insecticidal protein,
CRYIA(b) -endotoxin, and protects the maize plants from leave and stalk damage
caused by ECB larvae.

Description of the novel trait
Resistance to the European Corn Borer (ECB)
Bacillus thuringiensis ssp. kurstaki is an endospore-forming, gram-positive, soil-borne
bacterium. In its sporogenic stage, besides an endospore, it produces several

2
Extracted from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Decision Document 97-19.

insecticidal protein crystals, including the -endotoxin CRYIA(b) protein active
against certain lepidopteran insects such as the European Corn Borer (ECB), Spruce
Budworm, Tent Caterpillar, Gypsy Moth, Diamondback Moth, Cabbage Looper,
Tobacco Budworm, and Cabbage Worm. The protein has been repeatedly shown to
be non-toxic to humans, other vertebrates and beneficial insects (Lee et al., 1995).
MON810 was transformed with one copy of cryIA(b) gene under the control of the
strong constitutive enhanced CaMV 35S promoter, and the maize HSP70 intron
leader sequence (Figure 4).
The cryIA(b) coding sequence from Bacillus thuringiensis ssp. kurstaki HD-1 was
modified to optimize and maximize the expression of the -endotoxin CRYIA(b)
protein in plants. The protein becomes toxic for lepidopteran larvae following
cleavage to a bio-active, trypsin-resistant core. The insecticidal activity is thought to
depend on the binding of the active fragment to specific receptors present on midgut
epithelial cells of susceptible insects and on the subsequent formation of pores,
disrupting the osmotic balance and eventually resulting in cell lysis. Specific
lepidopteran pests of maize sensitive to the protein are ECB and corn earworm.
The amino acid sequence of the toxin expressed in the modified maize was found to
be identical to that occurring naturally, and equivalent to the protein produced as a
biopesticide being widely used by the organic food industry.

Figure 4. Schematic representation of the cryIA(b) construct from plasmid PV-
ZMBK07 used in the transformation of MON810, including the enhanced CaMV 35S-
promoter, the maize hsp70 intron 1 and the synthetic -endotoxin cryIA(b) gene
followed by the nos terminator (modified from BATS, 2003).

Development method
MON810 was obtained from maize genotype Hi-II by biolistic transformation with a
mixture of plasmid DNAs, PV-ZMBK07 and PV-ZMGT10. The PV-ZMBK07 plasmid
contained the cryIA(b) gene (Figure 5) and PV-ZMGT10 plasmid contained the CP4

P-E35S hsp70 cryIA(b) T-nos

EPSPS and gox genes. Both plasmids also contained the nptII gene (for bacterial
selection) under the control of a bacterial promoter, and an origin of replication from a
pUC plasmid (ori-pUC) required for replication of the plasmids in E. coli. The two
vectors were introduced by microprojectile bombardment into cultured plant cells.
Glyphosate tolerant transformed cells were selected and subsequently cultured in
tissue culture medium for plant regeneration (Armstrong et al., 1991).
Molecular analyses provided by the authors indicated that only the elements from
construct PV-ZMBK07 were integrated into the genome of line MON810 as a single
insert, consisting of the enhanced CaMV 35S (E35S) promoter, the hsp70 leader
sequence and the truncated cryIA(b) gene. The nos 3' termination signal, present in
plasmid PV-ZMBK07, was lost through a 3' truncation of the gene cassette and
therefore was not integrated into the host genome (BATS, 2003).

Figure 5. Schematic representation of the plasmid PV-ZMBK07 used in engineering
MON810 (taken from Agbios Database on Essential Biosafety)

Stability of insertion of the introduced traits
Data provided by the authors show that segregation and stability were consistent with
a single site of insertion of the cryIA(b) gene into the MON810 genome. The stability
of the insertion was demonstrated through multiple generations of crossing. The
maize line has been crossed with several different maize genotypes for 4 generations
CryIA(b)

with protection against ECB maintained. MON810 was derived from the third
generation of backcrossing. Stable integration of the single insert was demonstrated
through all three generations by Southern Blot analysis.

Regulatory decision
Planting of maize line MON810 was approved in the United States in July 1996 by
the Environmental Protection Agency. Commercialisation of this line of maize in the
EU was authorised following Commission Decision 98/294/EC of 22 April 1998
(Commission Decision 98/294/EC).
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency issued the Decision Document 97-19 for its
approval as food and feed. The MON810 line is also approved in Argentina,
Australia, Japan, South Africa and Switzerland.
This line of maize is intended for human consumption (wet mill, dry mill or seed oil),
and meal and silage for livestock feed.


Characteristics of maize Bt-176
3


Designation Event 176 Bt maize
Applicant Ciba Seeds of Ciba-Geigy and Mycogen
Corporation
Plant Species Zea mays L. (maize)
Novel Traits Resistance to European Corn Borer
(Ostrinia nubilalis); tolerance to glufosinate
ammonium herbicide
Trait Introduction Method Particle acceleration (biolistics) on
immature embryos
Proposed Use For cultivation as hybrid grain maize

Ciba Seeds and Mycogen Corporation have developed a maize line resistant to the
European Corn Borer (ECB). This maize line, designated as Event Bt-176, has been
transformed by means of recombinant DNA technology and microprojectile
bombardment of embryos, to produce an insecticidal protein, from Bacillus
thuringiensis ssp. kurstaki, active against certain species of Lepidoptera, the insect
order to which butterflies and moths belong, including ECB. Specifically, this protein
is a truncated form of the CRYIA(b) -endotoxin and protects maize plants against
feeding damage caused by ECB larvae. In addition, this line of maize was co-
transformed with a gene that confers tolerance to the herbicide glufosinate
ammonium, used to select transformed plants at very early stages of development.

Description of the novel traits
Resistance to European Corn Borer (ECB)
Bacillus thuringiensis ssp. kurstaki is an endospore-forming, gram-positive, soil-borne
bacterium. In its sporogenic stage, besides the endospore, it produces several
insecticidal protein crystals, including the -endotoxin CRYIA(b) protein, active
against certain lepidopteran insects such as the European Corn Borer (ECB), Spruce
Budworm, Tent Caterpillar, Gypsy Moth, Diamondback Moth, Cabbage Looper,

3
Extracted from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Decision Document DD96-09.

Tobacco Budworm, and Cabbage Worm. The protein has been repeatedly shown to
be non-toxic to humans, other vertebrates and beneficial insects (Lee et al., 1995).
A synthetic cryIA(b) gene, derived from Bacillus thuringiensis ssp. kurstaki strain HD-
1, coding for a truncated form of the CRYIA(b) -endotoxin, and modified to enhance
its expression in maize was developed. The synthetic gene has approximately 65%
homology at nucleotide level with the native gene (Koziel et al., 1993). The truncated
CRYIA(b) protein contains the insecticidal region of the native CRYIA(b). The
insecticidal activity is thought to depend on the binding of the active fragment to
specific receptors present on midgut epithelial cells of susceptible insects and on the
subsequent formation of pores which disrupt the osmotic balance, resulting in cell
lysis, cessation of feeding and eventual insect death.
Event Bt-176 was obtained by transformation with two synthetic cryIA(b) gene
constructs. One construct is under the transcriptional control of the maize
phosphoenolpyruvate-carboxylase promoter (P-PEPC), and is expressed in green
tissues. The second construct is under the control of a maize calcium-dependent
protein-kinase promoter (P-CDPK) and is specifically expressed in the pollen. Both
constructs are terminated with a Cauliflower Mosaic Virus derived terminator (T-
CaMV 35S) and also include intron 9 from the maize phosphoenolpyruvate-
carboxylase gene (see Figure 6 and Figure 7).
Expression of the CRYIA(b) protein in green tissues is intended to render the plant
resistant to first generation ECB larvae feeding on leaves. Expression in pollen is
intended to target second-generation ECB larvae, which are known to feed on pollen.
CRYIA(b) protein from Event Bt-176 leaves was subjected to in vitro digestibility
studies under simulated mammalian gastric conditions and was shown to be
degraded as conventional dietary protein.

Figure 6. Schematic representation of the synthetic cryIA(b) gene under the control
of the CDPK promoter (from Matsuoka et al., 2000).

P-CDPK

cryIA(b)
PEPC Intr # 9
T-35S


Figure 7. Schematic representation of the synthetic cryIA(b) gene under the control
of the PEPC promoter (from Matsuoka et al., 2000).

Glufosinate ammonium herbicide tolerance
The glufosinate ammonium tolerance gene (bar gene), derived from the common soil
bacterium Streptomyces hygroscopicus, codes for a phosphinotricin
acetyltransferase (PAT) under the transcriptional control of the CaMV 35S
constitutive promoter, active in all plant tissues except pollen. Phosphinotricin, a
glutamine-synthetase inhibitor, is the active moiety of glufosinate ammonium. The
herbicidal activity of phosphinotricin is characterised by the inhibition of glutamine-
synthetase resulting in the accumulation of lethal amounts of ammonia in the plant.
PAT catalyses the acetylation of phosphinotricin, thus eliminating its herbicidal
activity.
The L- isomer of phosphinotricin (L-PPT) is widely used as a broad-spectrum weed
control agent. L-PPT is the active ingredient of the herbicide glufosinate ammonium
developed by Hoechst and named BASTA. This isomer is a structural analogue of
glutamate, the substrate of glutamine-synthetase (see the comparison of L-PPT and
glutamate in Figure 8).

O H H

CH
3
P CH
2
CH
2
C COOH HOOC CH
2
CH
2
C COOH

OH NH
2
NH
2

Figure 8. L-isomer of phosphinotricin (left) compared to glutamate (right)

T-35S

cryIA(b)
PEPC Intr # 9

P-PEPC

Originally L-PPT was isolated from Streptomyces viridochromogenes, which
synthesises only the L-isomer of phosphinotricin. Synthetic glufosinate ammonium is
an equimolar, racemic mixture of the D- and L-isomers of PPT (D-PPT exhibits no
herbicidal activity). PAT was shown to act specifically on phosphinotricin, since no
other activity was observed on other common acetyltransferase substrates, including
pyruvate, choline or serine.
In vitro digestibility studies, under simulated mammalian gastric conditions,
conducted on E. coli expressed PAT, revealed that this protein is digested as
conventional dietary protein.
The glufosinate ammonium tolerance gene was co-introduced as a selectable marker
allowing the identification of transformed embryos on selective medium and to allow
tracking of introduced genes during plant breeding. As reported (FSANZ, 2000),
molecular data indicated that line Bt-176 contains one copy of the bar gene, under
transcriptional regulation of the 35S promoter and the 35S terminator from
Cauliflower Mosaic Virus (P-CaMV 35S and T-CaMV 35S, respectively) (see Figure
9).

Figure 9. Schematic representation of the bar gene (derived from Matsuoka et al.,
2000)

Development method
Event Bt-176 was obtained by biolistic transformation of the inbred maize line
CG00526 (Zea mays L.) with two plasmids. The two synthetic cryIA(b) gene
constructs were co-cloned into a single plasmid vector (pCIB4431). A second plasmid
vector (pCIB3064) contained the herbicide tolerance gene (bar) isolated form the soil
bacterium Streptomyces hygroscopicus. The two vectors were introduced into the
maize line CG00526 by microprojectile bombardment of immature embryos.
Molecular analyses of the transformed plant indicated that two or more copies of
each plasmid constructs are integrated in the genome of the maize line. Assays and
Northern blot analyses indicated that the ampicillin resistance gene (bla gene),

P-35S

bar T-35S

regulated by a bacterial promoter (used for selection of the vectors in bacterial
backgrounds) was not expressed in either leaf tissues or pollen from the plant. Two
independent transgenic maize events were chosen for further crossing and
characterisation: Event 171 and Event 176 (Koziel et al., 1993).
Additional characterisation studies confirmed the presence in Bt-176 corn of the
cryIA(b) (Koziel et al., 1993), bar and bla genes (Privalle, 1994). Data, as reported by
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ, 2000) also indicate that there may
be as many as six copies of the cryIA(b) and bla genes present in Bt-176, and at
least two of the bar gene (together with the 35S promoter), as determined by
Southern analysis against Bt-176 maize DNA (Privalle, 1994).

Stability of insertion of the traits
As reported (FSANZ, 2000), the production of CRYIA(b) and PAT proteins in leaves
and pollen of greenhouse-grown plants, was determined to be stable over four
successive backcross generations. Segregation analyses indicated that the
resistance to ECB and herbicide tolerance traits co-segregates as linked Mendelian
traits. A study of 3240 plants indicated that only five plants (0.15%) were identified as
being tolerant to glufosinate ammonium but susceptible to damage by ECB larvae.

Regulatory decision
In August 1995, the Environmental Protection Agency of the United States
conditionally approved the commercialisation of field maize derived from Event 176,
until the year 2000.
The commercialisation of this line of maize was authorised in the EU following
Commission Decision 97/98/EC of 23 January 1997. This line of maize is intended
for cultivation, for seed production and the production of silage and grain for animal
feed and grain for industrial processing (Commission Decision 97/98/EC).


References
Agbios database on Essential Biosafety. Molecular Characterization of MON810
inserted DNA. http://www.agbios.com/main.php (accessed January 2010)

Armstrong, C. L., Green, C. E. and Phillips, R.L. (1991). Development and availability
of germplasm with high type II culture formation response. Maize Genetics
Cooperation NewsLetter 65, 92-93.

BATS (2003). Genetically Modified (GM) Crops: molecular and regulatory details.
http://www.bats.ch/gmo-watch/index.php (accessed January 2010)

Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Plant Products Directorate, Plant Biosafety
Office. Decision Document DD96-09: Determination of Environmental Safety of
Event 176 Bt Corn (Zea mays L.) Developed by Ciba Seeds and Mycogen
Corporation. http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/dd/dd9609e.shtml
(accessed January 2010)

Office. Decision Document DD95-05: Determination of Environmental Safety of
Monsanto Canada Inc.'s Glyphosate Tolerant Soybean (Glycine max L.) Line GTS
40-3-2.http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/dd/dd9505e.shtml (accessed
January 2010)

Office. Decision Document 97-19: Determination of the Safety of Monsanto
Canada Inc.'s Yieldgard
TM
Insect Resistant Corn (Zea mays L.) Line MON810.
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/dd/dd9719e.shtml (accessed
January 2010)

Commission Decision 97/98/EC of 23 January 1997 concerning the placing on the
market of genetically modified maize (Zea mays L.) with the combined
modification for insecticidal properties conferred by the Bt-endotoxin gene and
increased tolerance to the herbicide glufosinate ammonium, pursuant to Council
Directive 90/220/EEC. (OJ L 31, 1.2.1997, p. 69).


Commission Decision 96/281/EC of 3 April 1996 concerning the placing on the
market of genetically modified soya beans (Glycine max L.) with increased
tolerance to the herbicide glyphosate, pursuant to Council Directive 90/220/EEC.
(OJ L 107, 30.4.1996, p. 10).

Commission Decision 98/294/EC of 22 April 1998 concerning the placing on the
market of genetically modified maize (Zea mays L. line MON810), pursuant to
Council Directive 90/220/EEC. (OJ L 131, 5.5.1998, p. 33).

Food Standards Australia New Zealand FSANZ (formerly Australia New Zealand
Food Authority - ANZFA) (2000). Draft risk analysis report. Food produced from
insect-protected Bt-176 corn. Application 385.
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/A385%20FA.pdf (accessed January
2010)

Koziel, M.G. et al. (1993). Field performance of elite transgenic maize plants
expressing an insecticidal protein derived from Bacillus thuringiensis.
BIO/Technology 11, 194200.

Lee, T.C., Zeng, J., Bailey, M., Sims, S.R., Sanders, P.R. and Fuchs, R.L. (1995).
Assessment of equivalence of insect protected corn- and E. coli-produced B.t.k.
HD-1 protein. Plant Physiol. Suppl. 108, 151.

Matsuoka, T., Kawashima, Y., Akiyama, H., Miura, H., Goda, Y., Kusakabe, Y.,
Isshiki, K., Toyota, M., and Hino, A. (2000). A method of detecting Recombinant
DNAs from four lines of genetically modified maize. Journal of Food Hygienic
Society of Japan 41, 137-143.

Monsanto Company (2000). Updated Molecular Characterization and Safety
Assessment of Roundup Ready Soybean Event 40-3-2. Monsanto Report,
Product Safety Centre.

Padgette, S.R., Kolacz, K.H., Delannay, X., Re, D.B., LaVallee, B.J., Tinius, C.N.,
Rhodes, W.K., Otero, Y.I., Barry, G.F., Eichholtz, D.A., Peschke, V.M., Nida, D.L.,
Taylor, N.B. and Kishore, G.M. (1995). Development, identification, and
characterization of a glyphosate-tolerant soybean line. Crop Science 35, 1451
1461.


Padgette, S.R., Re, D.B., Barry, G.F., Eicholtz, D.E., Delannay, X., Fuchs, R.L.,
Kishore, G.M., and Fraley, R.T. (1996). New weed control opportunities:
Development of soybeans with a Roundup Ready gene. In Duke, S.O. (ed.)
Herbicide-Resistant Crops. Agricultrual, Economic, Regulatory and Technical
Aspects. CRC Lewis Publishers., pp 53-84.

Privalle, L. (1994). Quantification of Cry1A(b) and PAT proteins in Bt corn (corn)
tissues, whole plants and silage. Performing laboratory: Ciba Seeds Agricultural
Biotechnology Research Unit, Ciba-Geigy Corporation, Research Triangle Park,
NC, USA. Study No CAB-009-94.

Windels, P., Taverniers, I., Depicker, A., Van Bockstaele, E. and De Loose, M.
(2001). Characterisation of the Roundup Ready soybean insert. European Food
Research Technology 213, 107-112.





Session 8

Characteristics of the Qualitative PCR Systems
Described in the Manual


Characteristics of the Qualitative PCR Systems Described in the Manual 2


Table of Contents

Session 8

Characteristics of the Qualitative PCR Systems Described in the
Manual

Characteristics of the qualitative PCR systems described in the manual 3
Plant specific PCR 3
Detection of the lectin gene 3
Detection of the zein gene 3
Screening method: Detection of the CaMV 35S promoter and nos terminator 4
Detection of the CaMV 35S promoter 4
Detection of the nos terminator 5
GMO specific PCR 7
Specific detection of the CTP/EPSPS gene cassette in Roundup Ready soybean 7
Detection of the synthetic cryIA(b) gene of maize Bt-176 7
Specific detection of the E35S promoter/hsp70exon-intron cassette of maize MON810 9

References 11


Characteristics of the qualitative PCR systems described in the
manual
During this course different detection systems will be used: 1) plant-specific primers
will be used to confirm the presence and quality (amplifiability) of the DNA extracted
from the samples; 2) the so called screening method, based on the specific
detection of the most common regulatory sequences, the 35S promoter and nos
terminator. These two methods will be performed following a simple PCR protocol.
Finally, GMO-specific primers will be used in nested PCR for the selective detection
and identification of the different transgenic lines. This chapter contains a brief
introduction to the different systems used for the detection and characterization of
Roundup Ready soybean, MON810 maize and the cryIA(b) gene contained in Bt-
176 maize. For further information on primer sequences and composition see
Session 9.

Plant specific PCR
Detection of the lectin gene

For the identification of soybean DNA, primers GMO3 and GMO4 (Meyer et al.,
1996), which amplify a fragment of the lectin gene (Le1), specific to soybean, will be
used.
As indicated above, the purpose is to confirm the presence and quality of the DNA
extracted from soybean containing samples, where DNA quality is intended here as
amplifiability by PCR. The primers GMO3 and GMO4 are used as a nested PCR for
the second soybean-PCR reported by Meyer and Jaccaud (1997) on the DNA
extracted from processed foods. The expected product is an amplicon of 118 bp.

Detection of the zein gene

The primers ZEIN3 and ZEIN4 (Studer et al., 1997) specific to the maize zein gene
(Ze1, coding for a 10-kb protein) will be used to confirm the presence and quality of
DNA extracted from maize-containing samples. As for the lectin gene, the primers
ZEIN3 and ZEIN4 have originally been designed as internal primers (second round
PCR) in a nested PCR system for the detection of maize DNA extracted from

processed foods. If the extracted target DNA is present, intact and amplifiable, we
expect the amplification of a band of 277 bp.

Screening method: Detection of the CaMV 35S promoter and nos
terminator
The detection of the 35S promoter and nos terminator by PCR constitutes the so-
called screening method for the identification of genetically modified plant-derived
foodstuffs. The use of the 35S promoter and nos terminator as target sequences
allows the detection of most genetically modified foodstuff since they are up-to-now
present in nearly all EU approved genetically modified plants (Hemmer, 1997). The
characteristics of some maize lines approved for market introduction in the EU are
listed in Table 1 as an example. The 35S promoter and nos terminator specific
primers used during the course were used to validate a PCR method for the
detection of Roundup Ready soybean and Maximizer maize (Bt-176) in processed
food fractions (Lipp et al., 2001).

Table 1. Characteristics of some transgenic maize lines authorised for market
introduction in the EU

Name Company Character Promoter
Gene(s)
introduced
Terminator
Event 176 Ciba-Geigy Bt, bar
35S
PEPC
CDPK
bar
cryIA(b)/int.9 PEPC
cryIA(b)/int.9 PEPC
35S
35S
35S
Line Bt-11 Novartis Bt, pat 35S cryIA(b)/int. IVS6 nos
Line T25 AgrEvo pat 35S pat 35S
Line MON810 Monsanto Bt
E35S
E35S
cryIA(b)/int.hsp70
cryIA(b)/int.hsp70
-
-

Detection of the CaMV 35S promoter

This promoter regulates the gene expression of many transgenic plants such as
Roundup Ready soybean and maize line Bt-176. For its specific detection, primers
p35S-cf3 and p35S-cr4 will be used (Lipp et al., 2001). The expected amplicon is a

123 bp fragment as indicated below in Figure 1, where primers p35S-cf3 and p35S-
cr4 have been positioned in the corresponding region of the CaMV 35S promoter
sequence.

ID A18053_3; parent: A18053
AC A18053;
FT promoter 396..1779
FT /note="35S3 promoter sequence derived from cauliflower
FT mosaic virus isolate CabbB-JI"
SQ Sequence 1384 BP;

nnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnn
1140
ctgccgacag tggtcccaaa gatggacccc cacccacgag gagcatcgtg gaaaaagaag
1200
acgttccaac cacgtcttca aagcaagtgg attgatgtga catctccact gacgtaaggg
1260 p35S-cf3
atgacgcaca atcccactat ccttcgcaag acccttcctc tatataagga agttcatttc
1320 p35S-cr4
atttggagag gacacgctga aatcaccagt ctctctctat aaatctatct ctctctctat
1380
aacc
1384
//

Figure 1. Partial sequence of the 35S promoter from Cauliflower Mosaic Virus
(CaMV) and hybridisation sites of primers p35S-cf3 and p35S-cr4

Detection of the nos terminator

Primers HA-nos118-f and HA-nos118-r (Lipp et al., 2001) are used for the detection
of the nos terminator. The nos terminator is present in the Roundup Ready soybean
and other lines of transgenic plants (e.g. maize line Bt-11). Amplification of the nos
terminator will result in the production of a DNA fragment of 118 bp. In Figure 2,
primers HA-nos118-f and HA-nos118-r have been positioned inside the sequence of
the transgenic part of Roundup Ready soybean.



Roundup Ready soybean from Monsanto
Sequence of the transgenic part according to Patent WO 92/04449

HA-nos118-r >
151 nnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnga tccccgatct agtaacatag atgacaccgc

201 gcgcgataat ttatcctagt ttgcgcgcta tattttgttt tctatcgcgt
< HA-nos118-f
251 attaaatgta taattgcggg actctaatca taaaaaccca tctcataaat

301 aacgtcatgc attacatgtt aattattaca tgcttaacgt aattcaacag

351 aaattatatg ataatcatcg caagaccggc aacaggattc aatcttaaga

/ /

1601 gatccaggtg tcgccttcct tacggatcct ggcgcccatg gcctgcatgg

1651 ccttgcccgt attgatgacg tcctcgcctt ccagaaggcc ggtgatgcgc
GM09 >
1701 gtttcaccgc tcgcgagacc gccgaacatg aaggaccggt gggagatcga

1751 cttgtcgccg ggaatgcgga cggttccgga aaggccagag gatttgcggg

1801 cggttgcggg ccggctgctt gcaccgtgaa gcatgcaggc tgtagccact

1851 gatgctgaaa tcctaaagga acaaaacttt tgcataaaaa ttgaatcttt

1901 tttcaaaacc aacatagaat ttgctgaatt tttcagtttt ttagatccaa
GM08 >
1951 aaacaagaaa acttgaagat ttaggaactt ggggtttatg gaaattggaa

2001 ttgggattaa gggtttgtat cccttgagcc atgttgttaa tttgtgccat
p35S-cr4 >
2051 tcttgaaaga tctgctagag tcagcttgtc agcgtgtcct ctccaaatga
< GM07
2101 aatgaacttc cttatataga ggaagggtct tgcgaaggat agtgggattg
< GM05 < p35S-cf3
2151 tgcgtcatcc cttacgtcag tggagatatc acatcaatcc acttgctttg

2201 aagacgtggt tggaacgtct tctttttcca cgatgctcct cgtgggtggg

2251 ggtccatctt tgggaccact gtcggcagag gcatcttcaa cgatggcctt

2301 tcctttatcg caatgatggc atttgtagga gccaccttcc ttttccacta

2351 tcttcacaat aaagtgacag atagctgggc aatggaatcc gaggaggttt

2401 ccggatatta ccctttgttg aaaagtctca catcg

Figure 2. Sequence of the transgenic part of Roundup Ready soybean from
Monsanto according to Patent WO 92/04449


GMO specific PCR
The amplification primers that are used for the identification of Roundup Ready
soybean, Bt-176 maize and MON810 maize have been chosen for their capacity to
detect, in a specific way, the genetic structure inserted into the Roundup Ready
soybean, Bt-176 and MON810 maize genomes, respectively.

Specific detection of the CTP/EPSPS gene cassette in Roundup Ready
soybean

The primer pairs GMO9/GMO5 and GMO8/GMO7 were designed for the specific
detection of the transgene of Roundup Ready soybean by nested PCR (Meyer and
Jaccaud, 1997). The external primers GMO9 and GMO5 are complementary to the
DNA sequence corresponding to the CP4 EPSPS gene and to the CaMV 35S
promoter. The amplification of DNA with these two primers results in an amplicon of
447 bp. The internal primers, GMO8 and GMO7, are complementary to the epsps
petunia gene and to the CaMV 35S promoter. The amplification of DNA with these
internal primers results in a fragment of 169 bp, as shown in Figure 2.

Detection of the synthetic cryIA(b) gene of maize Bt-176

The primer pairs CRYIA1/CRYIA2 and CRYIA3/CRYIA4 were designed for the
specific detection of the synthetic cryIA(b) gene by nested PCR (Studer et al., 1997).
The external primers, CRYIA1 and CRYIA2, and the internal ones, CRYIA3 and
CRYIA4, are complementary to the DNA sequence of the cryIA(b) gene. As shown in
Figure 3, the two external primers (CRYIA1/CRYIA2) delimit a fragment of 420 bp
while internal primers CRYIA3/CRYIA4 produce a fragment of 189 bp.


ID I41419 standard; DNA; UNC; 1947 BP.
AC I41419;

DE Sequence 3 from patent US 5625136.

RA Koziel M.G., Desai N.M., Lewis K.S., Kramer V.C., Warren G.W., Evola
S.V.,
RA Crossland L.D., Wright M.S., Merlin E.J., Launis K.L., Rothstein S.J.,
RA Bowman C.G., Dawson J.L., Dunder E.M., Pace G.M., Suttie J.L.;
RT "Synthetic DNA sequence having enhanced insecticidal activity in
maize";
RL Patent number US5625136-A/3, 29-APR-1997.

FT source 1..1947
FT /db_xref="taxon:12908"
FT /organism="unclassified"

SQ Sequence 1947 BP; 412 A; 729 C; 528 G; 278 T; 0 other;
atggacaaca accccaacat caacgagtgc atcccctaca actgcctgag caaccccgag
60
gtggaggtgc tgggcggcga gcgcatcgag accggctaca cccccatcga catcagcctg
120
agcctgaccc agttcctgct gagcgagttc gtgcccggcg ccggcttcgt gctgggcctg
180
gtggacatca tctggggcat cttcggcccc agccagtggg acgccttcct ggtgcagatc
240
gagcagctga tcaaccagcg catcgaggag ttcgcccgca accaggccat cagccgcctg
300
gagggcctga gcaacctgta ccaaatctac gccgagagct tccgcgagtg ggaggccgac
360
cccaccaacc ccgccctgcg cgaggagatg cgcatccagt tcaacgacat gaacagcgcc
420
ctgaccaccg ccatccccct gttcgccgtg cagaactacc aggtgcccct gctgagcgtg
480
tacgtgcagg ccgccaacct gcacctgagc gtgctgcgcg acgtcagcgt gttcggccag
540
cgctggggct tcgacgccgc caccatcaac agccgctaca acgacctgac ccgcctgatc
600
ggcaactaca ccgaccacgc cgtgcgctgg tacaacaccg gcctggagcg cgtgtggggt
660
cccgacagcc gcgactggat caggtacaac cagttccgcc gcgagctgac cctgaccgtg
720
ctggacatcg tgagcctgtt ccccaactac gacagccgca cctaccccat ccgcaccgtg
780
agccagctga cccgcgagat ttacaccaac cccgtgctgg agaacttcga cggcagcttc
840
cgcggcagcg cccagggcat cgagggcagc atccgcagcc cccacctgat ggacatcctg
900
aacagcatca ccatctacac cgacgcccac cgcggcgagt actactggag cggccaccag
960
atcatggcca gccccgtcgg cttcagcggc cccgagttca ccttccccct gtacggcacc
1020 CRYIA1 forward primer outer PCR
atgggcaacg ctgcacctca gcagcgcatc gtggcacagc tgggccaggg agtgtaccgc
1080
accctgagca gcaccctgta ccgtcgacct ttcaacatcg gcatcaacaa ccagcagctg
1140 CRYIA3 forward primer inner (nested) PCR
agcgtgctgg acggcaccga gttcgcctac ggcaccagca gcaacctgcc cagcgccgtg
1200
taccgcaaga gcggcaccgt ggacagcctg gacgagatcc cccctcagaa caacaacgtg
1260 CRYIA4 reverse primer inner (nested) PCR

ccacctcgac agggcttcag ccaccgtctg agccacgtga gcatgttccg cagtggcttc
1320
agcaacagca gcgtgagcat catccgtgca cctatgttca gctggattca ccgcagtgcc
1380
gagttcaaca acatcatccc cagcagccaa atcacccaga tccccctgac caagagcacc
1440 CRYIA2 reverse primer outer PCR
aacctgggca gcggcaccag cgtggtgaag ggccccggct tcaccggcgg cgacatcctg
1500
cgccgcacca gccccggcca gatcagcacc ctgcgcgtga acatcaccgc ccccctgagc
1560
cagcgctacc gcgtccgcat ccgctacgcc agcaccacca acctgcagtt ccacaccagc
1620
atcgacggcc gccccatcaa ccagggcaac ttcagcgcca ccatgagcag cggcagcaac
1680
ctgcagagcg gcagcttccg caccgtgggc ttcaccaccc ccttcaactt cagcaacggc
1740
agcagcgtgt tcaccctgag cgcccacgtg ttcaacagcg gcaacgaggt gtacatcgac
1800
cgcatcgagt tcgtgcccgc cgaggtgacc ttcgaggccg agtacgacct ggagagggct
1860
cagaaggccg tgaacgagct gttcaccagc agcaaccaga tcggcctgaa gaccgacgtg
1920
accgactacc acatcgatca ggtgtag

Figure 3. Optimised cryIA(b) gene inserted in maize Bt-176: Sequence of the
cryIA(b) gene SEQ ID No. 3 according to US Patent No 5625136 and Genebank
Accession No 141419

Specific detection of the E35S promoter/hsp70exon-intron cassette of maize
MON810

The primer pairs mg1/mg2 and mg3/mg4 were designed for the specific detection of
the E35S/hsp70 exon-intron 1 cassette by nested PCR (Zimmermann et al., 1998).
This gene construction is specific of maize MON810. The external primers, mg1 and
mg2 anneal to the E35S promoter sequence and to the hsp70 intron 1 region,
respectively, while the internal primers are complementary to the DNA sequence of
the E35S promoter and the hsp70 exon 1 region, respectively. As shown in Figure 4,
the two external primers (mg1/mg2) produce a fragment of 401 bp while mg3/mg4
produce a fragment of 149 bp.



Figure 4. Schematic representation of part of the MON810 maize cassette including the
enhanced CaMV 35S-promoter and the maize hsp70 intron, and relative position of primers
mg1, mg2, mg3, and mg4 (modified from Zimmermann et al., 1998)
Plant
DNA
401 bp
149 bp mg1 mg2
mg3 mg4
P-E35S
hsp70 exon 1
hsp70 exon 2
hsp70 intron 1
hsp70 intron

References
Hemmer, W. (1997). Foods Derived from Genetically Modified Organisms and
Detection Methods. Biosafety Research and Assessment of Technology Impacts
of the Swiss Priority Program Biotechnology Report 2/97, 61 pages.
http://www.bats.ch/bats/publikationen/1997-2_gmo/index.php (accessed January
2010)


Meyer, R., Chardonnens, F., Hubner, P. and Luthy, J. (1996). Polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) in the quality and safety assurance of food: detection of soya in
processed meat products. Zeitschrift fr Lebensmittel-Untersuchung und -
Forschung A 203, 339-344.

Meyer, R. and Jaccaud, E. (1997). Detection of genetically modified soya in
processed food products: development and validation of a PCR assay for the
specific detection of Glyphosate-Tolerant Soybeans. Proceedings of the EURO
FOOD CHEM IX Conference, Interlaken, Switzerland, Event No. 220 1, 2328.

Studer, E., Dahinden, I., Lthy, J. and Hbner, P. (1997). Nachweis des
gentechnisch vernderten Maximizer"-Mais mittels der Polymerase-
Kettenreaktion (PCR). Mitteilungen aus dem Gebiet der Lebensmittel und
Hygiene 88, 515524.

Zimmermann, A., Liniger, M., Lthy, J. and Pauli, U. (1998). A sensitive detection
method for genetically modified MaisGard
TM
corn using a nested-PCR system.
Lebensm.-Wiss. U.-Technol. 31, 664-667.





Session 9

Qualitative Detection of MON810 Maize, Bt-176 Maize
and Roundup Ready Soybean by PCR

M. Querci, M. Maretti, M. Mazzara

Qualitative Detection of MON810 Maize, Bt-176 Maize and Roundup Ready Soybean by PCR 2


Table of Contents

Session 9

Qualitative Detection of MON810 Maize, Bt-176 Maize and
Roundup Ready Soybean by PCR

Experimental 3

Introduction 3

Plant specific PCR: soybean-lectin 6
Plant specific PCR: maize-zein 9
Screening method for the detection of Genetically Modified Plants 12
Detection of the 35S promoter 12
Detection of the nos terminator 14
Specific detection of MON810 maize, Bt-176 maize and Roundup Ready soybean by
nested PCR 17
Detection of MON810 maize 17
Detection of Bt-176 maize 22
Detection of Roundup Ready soybean 26


Experimental
Introduction
The following protocols are PCR-based methods allowing the screening of GMOs (using the
35S promoter and the nos terminator) and the detection of specific GMOs (Roundup
Ready soybean, MON810 maize and Bt-176 maize) in raw and processed material, by
comparison with corresponding non-GM samples (soybean and maize).
The following methods allow only a qualitative result with indication of presence/absence of
the target sequence in the sample.

Equipment

Micropipettes
Thermocycler
Microcentrifuge
Vortex mixer
0.2 ml PCR reaction tubes
Separate sterile room with a UV hood

REMARK
All equipment should be DNA-free and where possible, sterilised prior to use.
In order to avoid contamination, barrier pipette tips protected against possible aerosol
formation should be used.

Reagents

dATP CAS1923-31-7
dCTP CAS102783-51-7
dGTP CAS93919-41-6
dTTP CAS18423-43-3
10x PCR buffer (usually delivered from the same supplier as the Taq DNA
polymerase)

25 mM MgCl
2

Taq DNA polymerase
Upstream and downstream oligonucleotides
Mineral oil (needed in case a thermocycler without hot lid is used)
Nuclease-free water

4 mM dNTP stock solution

dNTPs might be supplied in pre-mixed stocks - containing dATP, dCTP, dGTP, dTTP
in equal concentration - or separated in individual concentrated stocks. If individual
stocks are used, dissolve each dNTP in sterile de-ionised water, to have a final 4 mM
dNTP stock solution.
Divide in aliquots and store at -20C. dNTPs are stable for several months.

20 M primer solution

Primer oligonucleotides are generally supplied in lyophilised form and should be diluted to a
final concentration of 20 M.
Prepare 20 M primer solution according to the suppliers instructions.
- 1 M = 1 pmol/l so 20 M = 20 pmol/l
- Xnmol primer + 10X l sterile water = 100 pmol/l = 100 M
- Incubate 5 min at 65C, shake and incubate for another 3 min at 65C
- Dilution 1:5 Prepare 1 microcentrifuge tube with 400 l sterile water and add 100
l of the primer solution (100 M) Final concentration: 20 M
Divide into small aliquots and store at -20C. The aliquots stored at -20C are stable
for at least 6 months; the lyophilised primers are stable at -20C for up to three years.

10x PCR buffer

Usually the 10x PCR buffer, containing 500 mM KCl, 100 mM Tris-HCl (pH 9.0 at
25C) and 1% Triton X-100 is provided together with the Taq DNA polymerase and is
ready to use. The buffer should be mixed and briefly centrifuged before each use.
Aliquots are stored at -20C and are stable for several months.


25 mM MgCl
2
solution

PCR grade MgCl
2
solution is generally supplied together with the Taq DNA polymerase
and is ready to use. The solution should be mixed (vortex) before each use and briefly
centrifuged (destruction of the concentration gradient which can be formed in the case of a
prolonged conservation). Store at -20C.

Nuclease-free water aliquots

Sterile nuclease-free, deionised water aliquots are prepared for the Mastermix and for the
dilution of the DNA. For each series of analyses, a new aliquot should be used.


Plant specific PCR: soybean-lectin

The identification of soybean DNA is performed targeting the lectin gene.
The PCR with the primers GMO3/GMO4 determines if amplifiable soybean DNA is present
in the sample.

Characteristics of primers GMO3 and GMO4

GMO3
Sequence GCCCTCTACTCCACCCCCATCC
Length 22
Mol. Weight (g/mol) 6471.6
Melting point * (G/C) 65.1

GMO4
Sequence GCCCATCTGCAAGCCTTTTTGTG
Length 23

*based on a [Na
+
] of 50 mM

Controls

It is important to perform control experiments with every PCR analysis. Negative controls are
designed to check if the PCR reagents are contaminated with DNA. Positive controls with
characterised samples are also critical in determining the efficiency and specificity of PCR.
The following controls must be introduced in analysis performed with PCR:
Positive control: pure DNA, isolated from the conventional soybean
Negative control: pure DNA, isolated from another species, not containing the
lectin gene
No-template: negative control of the Mastermix, in which water is used instead of
DNA

Mastermix preparation

The necessary reagents for a series of 10 samples (including positive/negative/no template
controls) are mixed together according to the instruction given in Table 1.

The following procedure applies to a sample containing 48 l of GMO3/GMO4 Mastermix
and 2 l of DNA solution. All solutions are stored on ice during the preparation of the
Mastermix.

Table 1. GMO3/GMO4 Mastermix

Final
concentration
Mastermix
for one
sample
Mastermix
for 10
samples

Sterile, deionised water 32.75 l 327.5 l
10x PCR Buffer 1x 5 l 50 l
25 mM MgCl
2
2.5 mM 5 l 50 l
4 mM dNTPs 0.2 mM 2.5 l 25 l
20 M oligonucleotide GMO3 0.5 M 1.25 l 12.5 l
Taq DNA polymerase 0.025 U/l 0.25 l 2.5 l

TOTAL 48 l 480 l

Prepare a 1.5 ml microcentrifuge tube
Add the reagents following the order given in Table 1
Mix gently the GMO3/GMO4 Mastermix by pipetting and centrifuge briefly
Divide the Mastermix into aliquots of 48 l in 0.2 ml PCR reaction tubes
Add 2 l of the DNA solution to the previous aliquots
Shake gently and centrifuge briefly
Place the PCR reaction tubes in the thermocycler

PCR program* (GMO3/GMO4)

Temperature Time
Initial denaturation 95C 3 min

Denaturation 95C 30 sec
Annealing 63C 30 sec
Extension 72C 30 sec
Number of cycles 40

Final extension 72C 3 min
4C


Following amplification, the samples are centrifuged briefly and put on ice.

* Note: During the course, Perkin Elmer Gene Amp PCR system 9600, ABI 9700
thermocyclers will be used. The use of a different thermocycler models or brand leads
to the same results provided that PCR programmes are adapted and tested
accordingly
1
.

Analysis of PCR products

After amplification of the target sequence, the PCR products are analysed by agarose gel
electrophoresis in the presence of ethidium bromide. 8 l of a PCR reaction is mixed with 2
l loading buffer; samples are then loaded onto the agarose gel (1.5%). Migration is
performed at 100 V over a period of 1 hour. Size markers (15 l of 100 bp ladder) are
electrophoresed in adjacent wells of the gel to allow accurate size determination of the
amplicons. After the run, ultraviolet transillumination allows visualisation of the DNA in the
gel. The gel may be photographed to provide a permanent record of the result of the
experiment.

Interpretation of the results

The primer pair GMO3/GMO4 for the detection of the native lectin gene is used as a system
control check; a lectin specific band at 118 bp confirms if the extracted DNA is of appropriate
amplifiable quality.
The positive control will amplify a band at 118 bp. The negative control and the no-template
should not give a visible band.
If the positive/negative controls do not give the expected results, the PCR analysis of the
selected samples is not valid.
If the controls give the expected results and the sample does not have a band at 118 bp it
means that in this sample no amplifiable soybean DNA is present. It should be noted that
this as well as other protocols in this session are qualitative methods, therefore allowing only
a qualitative (yes/no) result.

1
The JRC and the WHO do not endorse any equipment used during the training courses or
mentioned in this manual. The analysis performed in our laboratories should be easily reproducible
using alternative equipment, provided the differing characteristics of the system used are taken into
account.

Plant specific PCR: maize-zein

The identification of maize DNA is performed targeting the zein gene.
The PCR with the primers ZEIN3/ZEIN4 determines if maize DNA of suitable amplification
quality is present in the sample.

Characteristics of primers ZEIN3 and ZEIN4

ZEIN3
Sequence AGTGCGACCCATATTCCAG
Length 19

ZEIN4
Sequence GACATTGTGGCATCATCATTT
Length 21

*based on a [Na
+
] of 50 mM

Controls

Positive control: pure DNA, isolated from the conventional maize
Negative control: pure DNA, isolated from another species, not containing the
zein gene
DNA


The necessary reagents for a series of 10 samples (including positives/negative/no template
controls) are mixed together according to the instructions given in Table 2.
The following procedure applies to a sample containing 48 l of ZEIN3/ZEIN4 Mastermix
and 2 l of DNA solution. All solutions are stored on ice during preparation of the Mastermix.


Table 2. ZEIN3/ZEIN4 Mastermix

Final
concentration
Mastermix
for one
sample
Mastermix
for 10
samples

25 mM MgCl
2
2.5 mM 5 l 50 l
4 mM dNTPs 0.2 mM 2.5 l 25 l
20 M oligonucleotide ZEIN3 0.5 M 1.25 l 12.5 l
20 M oligonucleotide ZEIN4 0.5 M 1.25 l 12.5 l

TOTAL 48 l 480 l

Mix gently the ZEIN3/ZEIN4 Mastermix by pipetting and centrifuge briefly

PCR program (ZEIN3/ZEIN4)

Temperature Time

Denaturation 96C 1 min
Annealing/Extension 60C 1 min
Number of cycles 40

4C



After amplification of the DNA, the PCR products are analysed using agarose gel
electrophoresis with ethidium bromide. 8 l of the solution is mixed with 2 l of loading
buffer. The solution mixture is then loaded onto an agarose gel (1.5%). Migration should take
place at 100 V over a period of 1 hour. Size markers (15 l of 100 bp ladder) are
electrophoresed in adjacent wells of the gel to allow accurate size determination of the
amplicons. After the run, ultraviolet transillumination allows visualisation of the DNA in the
gel. The gel may be photographed to provide a permanent record of the result of the
experiment.


The primer pair ZEIN3/ZEIN4 is used for detection of the native maize zein gene as a control
check on the amplification quality of the extracted DNA. If the extracted DNA is of sufficient
amplification quality a zein specific band of 277 bp will be observed on the gel.
The positive control should also amplify showing a band size of 277 bp.
The negative control and the no-template should not give a visible band.
If the controls give the expected results and the sample does not have a band at 277 bp, it
means that in this sample no amplifiable maize DNA is present.


Screening method for the detection of Genetically Modified Plants
Genes are under the regulation of promoters and terminators. The most widely used
sequences for the regulation of a transgene are the 35S promoter (derived from the CaMV)
and the nos terminator (derived from Agrobacterium tumefaciens). The identification of one
of these regulatory sequences in the soybean and/or maize containing sample under
examination indicates GMO presence.
In Roundup Ready soybean, the identification of both the 35S promoter and the nos
terminator is possible, whereas only the 35S promoter is present in the Bt-176 and MON810
maize lines.
Detection of the 35S promoter
Characteristics of primers p35S-cf3 and p35S-cr4

p35S-cf3
Sequence CCACGTCTTCAAAGCAAGTGG
Length 21
Mol. weight (g/mol) 6414.5

p35S-cr4
Sequence TCCTCTCCAAATGAAATGAACTTCC
Length 25

*based on a [Na
+
] of 50 mM

Controls

Positive control: DNA from reference material (maize 0.5% GM)
Negative control: DNA from reference material (maize 0% GM)
DNA



The following procedure applies to a sample containing 48 l of p35S-cf3/p35S-cr4
Mastermix and 2 l of DNA solution. All solutions are stored on ice during the preparation of
the Mastermix.

Table 3. p35S-cf3/p35S-cr4 Mastermix

Final
concentration
Mastermix
for one
sample
Mastermix
for 10
samples

25 mM MgCl
2
2.5 mM 5 l 50 l
4 mM dNTPs 0.2 mM 2.5 l 25 l
20 M oligonucleotide p35S-cf3 0.5 M 1.25 l 12.5 l
20 M oligonucleotide p35S-cr4 0.5 M 1.25 l 12.5 l

TOTAL 48 l 480 l

Mix gently the p35S-cf3/p35S-cr4 Mastermix by pipetting and centrifuge briefly

PCR program (p35S-cf3/p35S-cr4)

Temperature Time

Number of cycles 50

4C




Following amplification, the PCR products are analysed by agarose gel electrophoresis with
ethidium bromide. 8 l of the solution is mixed with 2 l of loading buffer; the solution is then
loaded onto the agarose gel (2.5%). Migration should take place at 100 V over a period of 1
hour. Size markers (15 l of 100 bp ladder) are electrophoresed in adjacent wells of the gel
to allow accurate size determination of the amplicons. After the run, ultraviolet
transillumination allows visualisation of the DNA in the gel. The gel may be photographed to
provide a permanent record of the result of the experiment.


The primer pair p35S-cf3/p35S-cr4 is used for detection of the CaMV 35S promoter, yielding
a 123 bp fragment. This promoter regulates the gene expression of many transgenic plants
such as Roundup Ready soybean and maize line Bt-176.
The positive control will amplify showing a band at 123 bp. The negative control and the no-
template should not give a visible band. If the positive/negative controls do not give the
expected results, the PCR analysis of the selected samples is not valid.
If the controls give the expected results and the sample gives a band at 123 bp, it means
that in this sample modified DNA is present.
Detection of the nos terminator
Characteristics of primers HA-nos 118-f and HA-nos 118-r

HA-nos 118-f
Sequence GCATGACGTTATTTATGAGATGGG
Length 24

HA-nos 118-r
Sequence GACACCGCGCGCGATAATTTATCC
Length 24

*based on a [Na
+
] of 50 mM

Controls

Positive control: DNA from reference material (RRS 0.5% GM)
Negative control: DNA from reference material (soybean 0% GM)
DNA


The following procedure applies to a sample containing 48 l of HA-nos118-f/HA-nos118-r
Mastermix and 2 l of DNA solution. All solutions are stored on ice during the preparation of
the Mastermix.

Table 4. HA-nos118-f/HA-nos118-r Mastermix

Final
concentration
Mastermix
for one
sample
Mastermix
for 10
samples

25 mM MgCl
2
2.5 mM 5 l 50 l
4 mM dNTPs 0.2 mM 2.5 l 25 l
20 M oligonucleotide HA-nos118-f 0.5 M 1.25 l 12.5 l
20 M oligonucleotide HA-nos118-r 0.5 M 1.25 l 12.5 l

TOTAL 48 l 480 l

Mix gently the HA-nos118-f/HA-nos118-r Mastermix by pipetting and centrifuge briefly


PCR Program (HA-nos118-f/HA-nos118-r)

Temperature Time

Number of cycles 50

4C



Following amplification, the PCR products are analysed using agarose gel electrophoresis
with ethidium bromide. 8 l of the solution is mixed with 2 l of loading buffer; the solution is
then loaded onto an agarose gel (2.5%). Migration should take place at 100 V over a period
of 1 hour. Size markers (15 l of 100 bp ladder) are electrophoresed in adjacent wells of the
gel to allow accurate size determination of the amplicons. After the run, ultraviolet


The primer pair HA-nos118-f/HA-nos118-r is used for detection of the nos terminator,
yielding a 118 bp fragment. This terminator is present in the Roundup Ready soybean and
other lines of transgenic plants (e.g. Maize line Bt-11).
The positive control will amplify showing a band at 118 bp.
If the controls give the expected results and the sample gives a band at 118 bp, this means
that in this sample modified DNA is present.

Specific detection of MON810 maize, Bt-176 maize and Roundup
Ready soybean by nested PCR

Detection of MON810 maize
The detection system is specific for MON810 maize. Target elements are the CaMV 35S
promoter and the hsp70 exon1/intron1 region, which are a constitutive regulatory sequence
and heat shock protein gene for an increased level of transcription, respectively.

Characteristics of primers mg1, mg2, mg3 and mg4

mg1
Sequence TATCTCCACTGACGTAAGGGATGAC
Length 25

mg2
Sequence TGCCCTATAACACCAACATGTGCTT
Length 25

mg3
Sequence ACTATCCTTCGCAAGACCCTTCCTC
Length 25

mg4
Sequence GCATTCAGAGAAACGTGGCAGTAAC
Length 25

*based on a [Na
+
] of 50 mM


Controls

Positive control: DNA from reference material (MON810 0.1%)
DNA

Mastermix preparation 1

The following procedure applies to a sample containing 48 l of mg1/mg2 Mastermix and 2
l of DNA solution. All solutions are stored in ice during the preparation of the Mastermix.

Table 5. mg1/mg2 Mastermix

Final
concentration
Mastermix
for one
sample
Mastermix
for 10
samples

25 mM MgCl
2
2.5 mM 5 l 50 l
4 mM dNTPs 0.2 mM 2.5 l 25 l
20 M oligonucleotide mg1 0.5 M 1.25 l 12.5 l

TOTAL 48 l 480 l

Mix gently the mg1/mg2 Mastermix by pipetting and centrifuge briefly


PCR program (mg1/mg2)

Temperature Time

Annealing
Extension
60C
72C
50 sec
50 sec
Number of cycles 35

4C



The necessary reagents for a series of 10 samples are mixed together according to the
instructions given in Table 6. The following procedure applies to a sample containing 49 l of
mg3/mg4 Mastermix and 1 l of pre-amplified DNA solution of the first PCR. All solutions are
stored on ice during the preparation of the Mastermix.

Table 6. mg3/mg4 Mastermix

Final
concentration
Mastermix
for one
sample
Mastermix
for 10
samples

25 mM MgCl
2
2.5 mM 5 l 50 l
4 mM dNTPs 0.2 mM 2.5 l 25 l

TOTAL 49 l 490 l

Mix gently the mg3/mg4 Mastermix by pipetting and centrifuge briefly


Program for the nested PCR (mg3-mg4)

Temperature Time

Annealing
Extension
60C
72C
50 sec
50 sec
Number of cycles 40

4C



Following amplification, the PCR products are analysed using agarose gel electrophoresis
with ethidium bromide. 8 l of the solution is mixed with 2 l of loading buffer; the solution is
then loaded onto an agarose gel (2.5%). Migration should take place at 100 V over a period
of 1 hour. Size markers (15 l of 100 bp ladder) are run in adjacent wells of the gel to allow
accurate size determination of the amplicons. After the run, ultraviolet transillumination
allows visualisation of the DNA in the gel. The gel may be photographed to provide a
permanent record of the result of the experiment.


The primer pairs mg1/mg2 and mg3/mg4 were designed for the specific detection of the
MON810 event by nested PCR, yielding a final nested PCR fragment of 149 bp. The
specificity is given by the fact that primers are designed on the region spanning the E-35S
promoter and the hsp70 exon/intron gene. The positive control will amplify showing a band
at 149 bp. The negative control and the no-template should not give a visible band.

If the controls give the expected results and the sample gives a band at 149 bp, this means
that in this sample MON810 maize DNA is present.

Detection of Bt-176 maize
The target gene is the cryIA(b) gene, which protects the plant from insects such as the
European Corn Borer.

Characteristics of primers CRYIA1, CRYIA2, CRYIA3 and CRYIA4

CRYIA1
Sequence CGGCCCCGAGTTCACCTT
Length 18

CRYIA2
Sequence CTGCTGGGGATGATGTTGTTG
Length 21

CRYIA3
Sequence CCGCACCCTGAGCAGCAC
Length 18

CRYIA4
Sequence GGTGGCACGTTGTTGTTCTGA
Length 21

*based on a [Na
+
] of 50 mM
Controls

Positive control: DNA from reference material (Bt-176 0.1%)
DNA



controls) are mixed together according to the instructions given in Table 5. The following
procedure applies to a sample containing 48 l of CRYIA1/CRYIA2 Mastermix and 2 l of
DNA solution. All solutions are stored on ice during the preparation of the Mastermix.

Table 5. CRYIA1/CRYIA2 Mastermix

Final
concentration
Mastermix
for one
sample
Mastermix
for 10
samples

25 mM MgCl
2
2.5 mM 5 l 50 l
4 mM dNTPs 0.2 mM 2.5 l 25 l
20 M oligonucleotide CRYIA1 0.5 M 1.25 l 12.5 l

TOTAL 48 l 480 l

Mix gently the CRYIA1/CRYIA2 Mastermix by pipetting and centrifuge briefly

PCR program (CRYIA1/CRYIA2)

Temperature Time

Annealing
Extension
60C
72C
40 sec
40 sec
Number of cycles 25

4C



instructions given in Table 6.
The following procedure applies to a sample containing 49 l of CRYIA3/CRYIA4 Mastermix
and 1 l of pre-amplified DNA solution of the first PCR. All solutions are stored on ice during
the preparation of the Mastermix.

Table 6. CRYIA3/CRYIA4 Mastermix

Final
concentration
Mastermix
for one
sample
Mastermix
for 10
samples

25 mM MgCl
2
2.5 mM 5 l 50 l
4 mM dNTPs 0.2 mM 2.5 l 25 l

TOTAL 49 l 490 l

Mix gently the CRYIA3/CRYIA4 Mastermix by pipetting and centrifuge briefly


Program for the nested PCR (CRYIA3/CRYIA4)

Temperature Time

Annealing
Extension
60C
72C
40 sec
40 sec
Number of cycles 35

4C



loaded onto an agarose gel (2.5%). Migration should take place at 100 V over a period of 1


The primer pairs CRYIA1/CRYIA2 and CRYIA3/CRYIA4 were designed for the specific
detection of the synthetic cryIA(b) gene by nested PCR, yielding a nested PCR fragment of
189 bp . This gene is present in maize line Bt-176 and other lines (e.g. Bt-11).
that in this sample Bt-176 maize DNA is present.


Detection of Roundup Ready soybean

The target is the CP4 EPSPS gene, which confers resistance to the herbicide Roundup.

Characteristics of primers GMO5, GMO9, GMO7 and GMO8

GMO5
Sequence CCACTGACGTAAGGGATGACG
Length (bp) 21

GMO9
Sequence CATGAAGGACCGGTGGGAGAT
Length (bp) 21

GMO7
Sequence ATCCCACTATCCTTCGCAAGA
Length (bp) 21

GMO8
Sequence TGGGGTTTATGGAAATTGGAA
Length (bp) 21

*based on a [Na
+
] of 50 mM

Controls

Positive control: DNA from reference material (RRS 0.1% GM)
Negative control: DNA from reference material (soybean 0% GM)
DNA



and 2 l of DNA solution. All solutions are stored on ice during the preparation of the
Mastermix.


Final
concentration
Mastermix
for one
sample
Mastermix
for 10
samples

25 mM MgCl
2
2.5 mM 5 l 50 l
4 mM dNTPs 0.2 mM 2.5 l 25 l

TOTAL 48 l 480 l



PCR program (GMO5/GMO9)

Temperature Time

Number of cycles 25

4C



instructions given in Table 8.
and 1 l of pre-amplified DNA solution of the first PCR. All solutions are stored on ice during
the preparation of the Mastermix.


Final
concentration
Mastermix
for one
sample
Mastermix
for 10
samples

25 mM MgCl
2
2.5 mM 5 l 50 l
4 mM dNTPs 0.2 mM 2.5 l 25 l

TOTAL 49 l 490 l



Program for the nested PCR (GMO7/GMO8)

Temperature Time

Number of cycles 35

4C



loaded onto an agarose gel (2.5%). Migration should take place at 100 V over a period of 1


The primer pairs GMO5/GMO9 and GMO7/GMO8 were designed for the specific detection
of the gene construct of Roundup Ready soybean by nested PCR, yielding a nested PCR
fragment of 169 bp. The primers GMO5 and GMO7 are complementary to the CaMV 35S
promoter, GMO9 hybridises with the CP4 EPSPS gene of Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 and
GMO8 with the CTP EPSPS gene.

The negative control and the no-template should not give a visible band. If the
positive/negative controls do not give the expected results, the PCR analysis of the selected
samples is not valid.
that in this sample Roundup Ready soybean DNA is present.





Session 10

Quantitative PCR for the Detection of GMOs

F. Weighardt

Quantitative PCR for the Detection of GMOs 2


Table of Contents

Session 10

Quantitative PCR for the Detection of GMOs

Introduction 3

PCR methods for quantification 4
History of real-time PCR techniques 6
Real-time PCR principles 7
Principles of quantification with real-time PCR 13

References 18


Introduction
Once a food product has been found to be positive for one or more GM events
(Roundup Ready soybean, Bt-176 maize, Bt-11 maize, MON810 maize, and T25
maize), the subsequent analytical steps consist of assessing compliance with the
Legislation in force, (Regulation (EC) 1829/2003, Regulation (EC) 1830/2003) by
measuring the amount of each GMO event present in the individual ingredients
(Figure 1).
The above-mentioned Regulations establish that all products consisting of, or
containing GMOs, or produced from GMOs must be labelled as such.
Labelling is not required for products containing materials, which contain, consist of
or are produced from GMOs in a proportion no higher than 0,9% of the food
ingredients considered individually, provided that this presence is adventitious or
technically unavoidable.
All the ingredients (flour, grid, oil, etc.) derived from one species (e.g. maize,
soybean, rapeseed, etc.) are considered collectively as one individual ingredient (e.g.
maize).

Figure 1. No labelling required. The amount of both GM soybean and GM maize is
below the legal threshold.

If, for instance, an ingredient exclusively derived from maize contains less than 0.9%
GM maize, no labelling is necessary for the foodstuff derived from it. If, on the other
hand, it contains more than 0.9% GM maize, the derived food products must be
labelled. This is also true even if in the final product, considering the sum of all the
ingredients derived from different species (e.g. soy and maize), the relative amount of
Maize non GM
99,4%
Maize GM
0,6%
Soya non GM
99,4%
SOYA GM
0,6%

GM maize drops below 0.9%. If two or more different GM maize varieties are present,
their concentrations should be summed up, and the total percentage used to
determine the requirement for labelling (Figure 2). If the resulting sum is below the
0.9% threshold, no labelling is required.

Figure 2. Labelling required for the maize ingredient. The sums of the Bt-11 (0.6%)
and Bt-176 (0.6%) events exceed the 0.9% threshold for labelling.

The relative GMO content (percentage) is determined by normalising the amount of
the GMO specific sequences against the amount of a plant specific gene (e.g. lectin
for soybean and invertase, or zein for maize). The resulting GMO percentage is
therefore expressed as: GMO (%) = GM-DNA/reference-DNA x 100.

PCR methods for quantification

A major drawback of conventional PCR is the lack of accurate quantitative
information due to amplification efficiency. If the reaction efficiency for each
amplification cycle remains constant, the concentration of DNA following PCR would
be directly proportional to the amount of initial DNA target. Unfortunately, the
amplification efficiency varies among different reactions, as well as in subsequent
cycles in a single reaction. In particular, in the later cycles of the PCR, the
amplification products are formed in a non-exponential fashion at an unknown
reaction rate.
DNA quantification based on conventional PCR relies on end-point measurements, in
order to achieve the maximum sensitivity, when the amplification reaches the
Maize non GM
98,8%
Maize Bt 176
0,6%
Soya non GM
100%
Maize Bt 11
0,6%

maximum product yield (known as the "plateau phase"). At this stage the reaction
has gone beyond the exponential phase primarily due to depletion of reagents and
the gradual thermal inactivation of the polymerase used. The resulting correlation
between the final product concentration and number of initial target molecules is
therefore limited.
To overcome this problem, techniques such as quantitative-competitive PCR (QC-
PCR) and real-time PCR, have been developed, which address the problems of
establishing a relationship between the concentration of target DNA and the amount
of PCR product generated by amplification.

Quantitative competitive PCR
One of the first quantitative PCR methods developed is the quantitative-competitive
PCR (Giacca et al., 1994; Studer et al., 1998; Hardegger et al., 1999). This method is
based on the co-amplification of target DNA template and defined amounts of an
internal DNA standard (competitor) carrying the same primer binding sites. Since the
initial amount of the competitor is known, and given that the amplification efficiencies
of the target and competitor DNA are the same, the ratio of the amounts of the two
PCR products, determined, e.g. by gel electrophoresis, is representative of the ratio
of target DNA and competitor present in the reaction mix prior to amplification.
Typically, a competitor is a linearised plasmid bearing the same nucleotide sequence
as the target DNA except for a deletion or an insertion in order to have, once co-
amplified, two distinct sized bands following standard gel electrophoresis.

Amplified DNA of target

Amplified DNA of competitor

Figure 3. Co-amplification of a fixed amount of target DNA with different amounts of
competitor DNA.

Competitive PCR has been used successfully to quantify both DNA and RNA, but its
dynamic range is limited to a target-to-competitor ratio between approximately 1:10 to
10:1. In fact, the best accuracy is obtained by finding the equivalence point at which
the ratio of target to competitor is 1:1 (Figure 3). To accomplish this, several dilutions
must be tested in order to achieve a suitable ratio of target to competitor.

Another drawback of this approach is the need to construct and characterise a
different competitor for every target to be quantified. In fact, even a slight difference
in amplification efficiency will severely compromise the accuracy of quantification by
means of quantitative competitive PCR. Finally, at the end of the reaction,
competitive PCR requires accurate quantification of the target and competitor
amplicons, which usually entails laborious post-PCR processing steps.
The competitive PCR is a semi-quantitative method requiring a standard (the
competitor) to be compared to the sample. The results can only indicate a value
below, equal or above a defined standard concentration.
The competitive PCR system has, however, the advantage that no specialised
equipment has to be acquired by the laboratories, since it is performed on generally
standard PCR and molecular biology laboratory equipment.

Real-time PCR
A more accurate and currently more widely used quantitative PCR methodology is
represented by real-time PCR. In contrast to the end-point determinations, real-time
PCR systems monitor the reaction as it actually occurs in real time. In this kind of
system the PCR reaction is coupled to the emission of a fluorescent signal being
proportional to the amount of PCR product produced in subsequent cycles. This
signal increases proportionally to the amount of PCR product generated in each
successive reaction cycle. By recording the amount of fluorescence emission at each
cycle, it is possible to monitor the PCR reaction during its exponential phase. The first
significant increase of fluorescence correlates to the initial amount of target template.
(Ahmed, 2002)

History of real-time PCR techniques
Higuchi et al. (1992, 1993) pioneered the analysis of PCR kinetics by setting-up a
system able to detect PCR products as they accumulate. This "real-time" system
included the intercalating molecule ethidium bromide in each reaction mix. A thermal
cycler adapted to irradiate the samples with UV light, and able to detect the resulting
fluorescence with a computer-controlled cooled CCD (charged coupled device)
camera was used to perform the runs. As amplification occurred, increasing amounts
of double-stranded DNA produced, and intercalated by ethidium bromide, resulted in
an increase in fluorescence. By plotting the fluorescent light emission versus the
cycle number, the system produced amplification plots providing a more complete

picture of the PCR process than assaying product accumulation after a fixed number
of cycles.
Real-time PCR principles
The specificity of a real-time PCR method depends both on the chemistry used to
generate and monitor the amplification reaction and the instrument used to monitor
the signal. Various chemistries have been developed for this purpose: intercalating
dyes (ethidium bromide, SYBR Green I) and hybridisation probes (TaqMan probes,
Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer probes, Molecular Beacons, Scorpions
and TaqMan Minor Groove Binder probes).

SYBR Green I dye based real-time PCR
The first real-time PCR application was directly derived from the experiments by
Higuchi et al. (1992, 1993) substituting ethidium bromide with a less toxic and more
specific and sensitive (from 10 to 25 times) fluorescent double stranded (ds) DNA
intercalating agent, SYBR Green I (Haugland, 2002).
SYBR Green I dye binds to the minor groove of dsDNA, but not ssDNA. As a
consequence of binding, fluorescence (excitation approx. 488 nm and 254 nm;
emission approx. 560 nm) is greatly enhanced (approx. from 800 to 1000 times). As
the PCR begins, the increasing amount of newly synthesised DNA results in an
increasing fluorescent signal (Figure 4). A limitation of the SYBR Green I based
sequence detection system is represented by its non-specific DNA recognition mode.
In fact, every double-stranded DNA molecule present in a PCR reaction is quantified,
including therefore non-specific PCR products and primer-dimers. To overcome the
problem and subtract the quantification component due to non-specific DNAs and to
primer dimers on some devices, it is possible to perform a melting curve analysis.
After the final stage of PCR, the products are slowly melted and fluorescence data
collected. Since every dsDNA has a specific melting temperature, it is possible to
quantify the components having different melting temperatures in one single reaction
mix, and therefore to eliminate the non-specific components from the quantification.


Sequence specific probes based real-time PCR methods
The problem of amplicon fluorescent detection specificity has been overcome using
sequence specific probes with a fluorescent labelling designed inside the PCR
primers pair. The process of probe hybridisation (and eventual degradation) usually
does not interfere with the exponential accumulation of the PCR product. A few
different principles are now used to achieve specific real-time PCR based
quantification reactions.

Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer (FRET) probes
Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer (FRET) is based on the energy transfer
from a donor fluorophor to an acceptor fluorophor (Figure 4) (Haugland, 2002). Basic
conditions for the FRET are:
Donor and acceptor molecules must be in close proximity (typically 10100 ).
The absorption spectrum of the acceptor must overlap with the fluorescence
emission spectrum of the donor.
Donor and acceptor transition dipole orientations must be approximately parallel.
If the donor and the acceptor fluorophor are in close proximity to each other,
excitation of the donor by blue light results in energy transfer to the acceptor, which
can then emit light of longer wavelength. The formation of PCR products can be
monitored by using two sequence specific, oligonucleotide probes with a fluorescent
label, called hybridisation probes, in addition to the PCR primers. Hybridisation
probes are designed as a pair of which one probe is labelled with the donor (3-
Fluorescine) and one with the acceptor (5- Red 640 or 5-Red 705) dye. As FRET
decreases with the sixth power of distance, hybridisation probes have to be designed
to hybridise to adjacent regions of the template DNA (usually they are separated by a
1-5 nucleotides gap). If both probes hybridise, the two dyes are brought close
together and FRET to the acceptor dye results in a signal measurable by means of
fluorometry.

Degradation probes (TaqMan principle)
The TaqMan assay exploits the 5' - 3' exonuclease activity of Taq DNA Polymerase
to cleave a degradation probe during PCR (Lie and Petropoulos, 1998). The
degradation, or TaqMan, probe is typically a 20-30 base long oligonucleotide (usually
with a Tm 10C higher than the Tm of the primers) that contains a reporter
fluorescent dye at the 5' and a quenching dye at the 3' end (Figure 4). Since the 3'

end is blocked, the probe cannot be extended like a primer. During the PCR reaction,
in the presence of a target, the probe specifically anneals between the forward and
reverse primer sites. When the probe is intact, the proximity of the reporter dye to the
quencher dye results in suppression of the reporter fluorescence primarily by Forster-
type energy transfer (Forster, 1948; Lakowicz, 1983). During the reaction, the 5-3
exonuclease activity of the Taq DNA Polymerase degrades the probe between the
reporter and the quencher dyes only if the probe hybridises to the target. This results
in an increase of the fluorescence as amplification proceeds. Accumulation of PCR
product is detected by monitoring the increase in fluorescence of the reporter dye.
This process occurs in every cycle and does not interfere with the exponential
accumulation of product. Different from FRET probes, degradation probes release
fluorochromes at each cycle adding new dye to the previous one released. As a
consequence, the fluorescent signal is greatly enhanced at each cycle. TaqMan
assay uses universal thermal cycling parameters and PCR reaction conditions. One
specific requirement for fluorogenic probes is that there be no G at the 5' end. A 'G'
adjacent to the reporter dye quenches reporter fluorescence even after cleavage.

Figure 4. Different
real-time PCR
principles.
I. SYBR green I.
II. FRET
(Fluorescence
Resonance Energy
Transfer) probes.
III. TaqMan 5`-3`-
degradation probes.

Molecular Beacons
Molecular Beacons are DNA probes designed to contain a stem-loop structure. The
loop sequence is complementary to the specific target of the probe and the stem
sequences are designed to be complementary to each other (Figure 5) (Tyagi and
Kramer, 1996). The 5 and 3 ends of the probe are covalently bound to a fluorophore
and a quencher. When the stem-loop structure is closed the fluorophore and the
quencher are close together. In this case, all photons emitted by the fluorophore are
absorbed by the quencher. In the presence of a complementary sequence, the probe
unfolds and hybridises to the target. The fluorophore is displaced from the quencher,
and the probe starts to fluoresce.

Figure 5. The principle of Molecular Beacons.


Scorpions
A further evolution is represented by the family of probes called Scorpions. A
Scorpion consists of a specific probe sequence with a stem-loop structure (Figure 6)
(Thelwell et al., 2000).
A fluorophore is attached to the 5' end giving a fluorescent signal that is quenched in
the stem-loop configuration by a moiety joined to the 3' end. The stem-loop is linked
to the 5' end of a primer. After the extension of the Scorpion primer, during
amplification, the specific probe sequence is able to bind to its complement within the
same strand of DNA. This hybridisation event opens the hairpin loop so that
fluorescence is no longer quenched and an increase in signal is observed. A PCR
stopper between the primer and the stem sequence prevents read-through of the
hairpin loop, which could lead to the opening of the hairpin loop in the absence of the
specific target sequence. The unimolecular nature of the hybridisation event gives
rise to some advantages over homogeneous probe systems. Unlike Molecular
Beacons, TaqMan or FRET assays, Scorpion assays do not require a separate probe
besides the primers.

Figure 6. The principle of Scorpion probes.

TaqMan MGB probes
A Minor Groove Binder (MGB) is a small crescent-shaped molecule that fits snugly
into the minor groove of duplex DNA (Kutyavin et al., 2000). In TaqMan probes, the
MGB group is attached at the 3' end along with the quencher dye (Figure 7). When
the TaqMan probe hybridises, the MGB stabilizes annealing by folding into the minor
groove of the DNA duplex created between the probe and the target sequence.
Stabilisation is much more effective when the duplexes are perfectly matched (i.e.
when there are no sequence mismatches). Besides the added discriminatory power,
the increased stability means TaqMan MGB Probes are very short (typically 1320
mer) compared to standard TaqMan probes (typically 1840 mer) while still satisfying
design guidelines. TaqMan MGB Probes have several advantages for quantitative
PCR, especially for multiplex assays. Improved spectral performance allows greater
precision and consistency between individual assays and the greater hybridisation
specificity enables enhanced target discrimination. Furthermore, the smaller probe
can make it easier to design assays by providing more scope for fitting probes within
shorter target regions such as consensus "windows" of sequence conservation or
divergence. Amplicon size can be reduced to a minimum by using shorter MGB
probes that can further improve inter-assay consistency.

Figure 7. The principle of Minor Groove Binder (MGB) probes.


Principles of quantification with real-time PCR
Relative quantification
The GMO content of a sample can be expressed as the amount of genetically
modified material in the total material amount. In order to determine this value in a
real-time PCR based system it is necessary to measure the number of DNA
sequences of an endogenous reference gene (for use as a normaliser) as well as
the number of GMO specific target DNA sequences. The reference gene should be
chosen in order to be species specific, being present as a single copy per haploid
genome, being stably represented as such in different lines of the same species and
being as amplifiable as the GMO traits in analysis (although this is more due to a
good primers-probe design). One problem in relative quantification arises from the
interpretation of percentage of GMO content that is not specified in the legislation;
therefore, the GM content (percentage) can be assumed as the weight of the pure
modified ingredient over the total weight of the pure ingredient (e.g. weight of GM
maize over total weight of entire maize contained in the sample). From the analytical
point of view, it is appropriate to calculate the GMO percentage as the number of
target DNA sequences per target taxon specific sequences this definition does not
take some important characteristics of the GMO lines; therefore the following
parameters need to be carefully considered in the interpretation of results:
a. The ploidy of the event. It is possible that the GM event has a different ploidy from
the wt event (e.g. tetraploid instead of diploid);
b. The zygosity of the event. The GM trait could be homozygous or heterozygous;
c. The number of insertions per haploid genome of one single artificial construct. One
construct could be inserted as a single copy per haploid genome or in more copies.

Point c. can be bypassed by designing the primer-probe system on the border of the
insertion of the construct in the genome. Since border sequences are unique this will
give the double advantage to the system of being event-specific and excluding
multiple insertions of the same construct from the quantification. Point a. and b. are
bypassed empirically by the use of reference materials being homogeneous with the
sample (e.g. maize flour reference material to quantify maize flour). Alternatively,
quantification standards different from certified reference materials (e.g. cloned DNA
sequences or genomic DNA mixtures) can be calibrated against certified reference
materials in order to correct molecular discrepancies in quantification. A widely

accepted way to solve problems related to points a) and b) is expressing the GMO
percentage in terms of haploid genomes.
In every case, this aspect of quantification should be taken into account when a
method is developed, since the limit of detection (LOD) and the limit of quantification
(LOQ) are influenced by the real number of copies being quantified.

Design of a real-time GMO quantification experiment
The design of a real-time PCR analysis must include the following components:
- One PCR system designed to detect a GMO-specific target DNA sequence.
- A second PCR system designed to detect an endogenous reference sequence,
possibly being species specific, but apt for use as a normaliser in the calculations of
the GM relative concentration(s).
- Standard curves for both the target and endogenous reference. For each
experimental sample, the amount of target and endogenous reference is determined
from the appropriate standard curve. The amount of target is normalised with the
endogenous reference quantity to obtain the relative concentration of the target. To
meet statistical requirements, the standard curves should include at least 4 different
concentration points. Each point of the standard curve, and the sample, should be
loaded at least in triplicate.
In addition to that, a negative control (NTC no template control) have to be added
for both the reference gene and the GMO quantifications. Other controls may be
used (e.g. negative DNA target control, positive DNA target control)
Finally, the reference gene quantification and the GMO specific sequence
quantification should occur in the same PCR run (co-amplification), and not in
different runs, to avoid a possible statistical fluctuation between different
experiments.

Multiplexed real-time PCR reactions
Depending upon the chemistry and the apparatus used for the quantification, it is
possible to design real-time PCR reactions to perform the quantification of the
reference and the GMO sequences separately in distinct tubes or in the same tubes
as a multiplexed reaction.
Both set-ups have advantages and disadvantages: multiplexed reactions are time
and reagent saving (it is possible to analyse twice the number of samples in one
single experiment), avoid set-up errors between the measure of the reference and
the GMO target gene since they occur in the same tube, but are less sensitive (in

terms of LOQ) because of the interference between the two reactions and the
differing consumptions of reagents of the two reactions. On the other hand, separate
reactions to measure the reference gene and the GMO target gene are more
sensitive in terms of LOQ, but require twice the reagents and wells on the real-time
PCR apparatus and are more exposed to the risk of, e.g. pipetting errors, when
measuring one sample. The availability of multiple reporter dyes for TaqMan probes
makes it possible to detect the amplification of more than one target in the same
tube. The reporter dye (FAM) is distinguishable from the other (VIC) because they
have different maximal emission wavelengths. As an example, the availability of
multiple dyes with distinct emission wavelengths (FAM, TET, VIC and JOE) makes it
possible to perform multiplex TaqMan assays. The dye TAMRA is used as a
quencher on the probe and ROX as passive reference in the reaction mix. For best
results, the combination of FAM (target) and VIC (endogenous control) is
recommended since they have the largest difference in the emission maximum. On
the other hand, JOE and VIC should not be combined. Multiplex TaqMan assays can
be performed on the ABI PRISM 7700, 7900, 7500, 7300 and 7000 Sequence
Detection Systems due to their capability to detect multiple dyes with distinct
emission wavelengths.

Graphical analysis of real-time PCR data
As real-time PCR is proceeding, fluorescence data (Rn values) are collected to build
up a plot of the amount of signal versus the cycle number (or the time). Usually the
plot is constructed on a semi-logarithmic scale. In real-time PCR it is possible to
distinguish three different phases: a first lag stage with slight fluctuations of the
plots corresponding to background signal; a second exponential phase with
increasing parallel plots, and a third stage where the plots tend to reach a plateau
(Figure 8).


Figure 8. A real-time PCR plot. The typical phases of a real-time PCR are
highlighted.

The power of real-time PCR resides in the fact that quantification occurs not at the
endpoint stage of the PCR reaction (plateau), but at the stage where the exponential
growth of the amount of amplified DNA (Rn value) reaches a point significantly
greater than background signal. This way of measuring significantly enhances the
accuracy of quantification since there is a direct correlation between the starting
amount of template and the stage at which the amplification starts to become
exponential. In real-time PCR a threshold cycle (C
T
) is experimentally defined as the
cycle in which the fluorescence signal reaches the mean of fluorescence signals
measured between the third and the fifteenth cycle plus ten standard deviations. The
higher the initial amount of genomic DNA, the sooner accumulated product is
detected in the PCR process, and the lower the C
T
value is. In practice, the choice of
the threshold line determining the C
T
value is often up to the operator, representing
one of the subjective elements in real-time PCR. The threshold line should be placed
above any baseline activity and within the exponential increase phase, which looks
linear in the log transformation (all plots are parallel). In any case the threshold line
should be placed at the level where the plots of the replicas start to coincide the
most. In fact, sometimes the replicas happen to have, in the very first part of the
exponential phase, a slight divergence diminishing or totally disappearing as the
reaction goes on.

Calculation of the GMO content
The output of the real-time PCR is a Rn, being the difference between Rn
+
(the
fluorescence signal including all components) and Rn
-
(the background signal of the
reaction baseline or reading of a NTC sample).
The GMO content of a sample can be determined in two different ways:
1. Two standard curves, based on different amounts of DNA, are plotted:
- The first curve with a quantification system specific for the reference gene;
- The second curve with a quantification system specific for the GM target.
For each sample the amount of the specific target and the reference gene are
determined by interpolation with the standard curve. The GMO DNA content
(percentage) is then calculated as the ratio between the GM target sequence amount
and the reference gene sequence amount (GM/reference
*
100).
It is worth considering that, necessarily; the samples in analysis must fall within the
upper and lower limits of both standard curves. Outliers must be excluded since they
are prone to quantification errors.
2. Comparative C
T
method (C
T
): This method uses no known amount of standards
but it compares the relative amount of the GMO target sequence to the reference
gene sequence. The standard curve is obtained by loading a series of samples at
different known concentrations of GMO content (e.g. certified reference materials
from the IRMM). The result is one standard curve of C
T
(C
T
= C
T reference gene
- C
T

GMO
) values. The GMO content value is obtained by calculating the C
T
value of the
sample and comparing it with the values obtained with the standards.
For this method to be successful, the amplification efficiencies of both the target and
reference PCR systems should be similar. A sensitive method to control this is to look
at how C
T
(the difference between the two C
T
values of two PCRs for the same
initial template amount) varies with template dilution. If the efficiencies of the two
amplicons are approximately equal, the plot of log input amount versus C
T
would
have a nearly horizontal line (a slope of <0.10). This means that both PCRs perform
equally efficiently across the range of initial template amounts. If the plot shows
unequal efficiency, the standard curve method should be used for GMO
quantification. The dynamic range should be determined for both (1) minimum and
maximum concentrations of the targets for which the results are accurate and (2)
minimum and maximum ratios of two gene quantities for which the results are
accurate. In conventional competitive RT-PCR, the dynamic range is limited to a
target-to-competitor ratio of about 10:1 to 1:10 (the best accuracy is obtained for 1:1
ratio). The real-time PCR is able to achieve a much wider dynamic range.

References
Regulation (EC) 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22
September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed. OJ L 268, 18.10.2003,
pp. 1-23.

Regulation (EC) 1830/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22
September 2003 concerning the traceability and labelling of genetically modified
organisms and the traceability of food and feed products produced from
genetically modified organisms and amending Directive 2001/18/EC. OJ L 268,
18.10.2003, pp 24-28.

Ahmed, F.E. (2002). Detection of genetically modified organisms in foods.
Trends in Biotechnology 5, 215-23.

Forster, T. (1948). Zwischenmolekulare Energiewanderung und Fluoreszenz. Ann
Phys (Leipzig) 2, 55-75.

Giacca, M., Zentilin, L., Norio, P., Diviacco, S., Dimitrova, D., Contreas, G., Biamonti,
G., Perini, G., Weighardt, F., Riva, S. and Falaschi, A. (1994). Fine mapping of a
replication origin of human DNA. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Science USA 91, 7119-23.

Hardegger, M., Brodmann, P. and Hermann, A. (1999). Quantitative detection of the
35S promoter and the nos terminator using quantitative competitive PCR.
European Food Research Technology 209, 8387.

Haugland, R.P. (2002). The Handbook of Fluorescent Probes and Research
Products, Ninth Edition. Molecular Probes, Inc.
http://www.invitrogen.com/site/us/en/home/References/Molecular-Probes-The-
Handbook.html (accessed January 2010)

Higuchi, R., Dollinger, G., Walsh, P.S. and Griffith, R. (1992). Simultaneous
amplification and detection of specific DNA sequences. Biotechnology 10, 413
417.


Higuchi, R., Fockler, C., Dollinger, G. and Watson, R. (1993). Kinetic PCR: Real-time
monitoring of DNA amplification reactions. Biotechnology 11, 10261030.

Kutyavin, I.V., Afonina, I.A., Mills, A., Gorn, V.V., Lukhtanov, E.A., Belousov, E.S.,
Singer, M.J., Walburger, D.K., Lokhov, S.G., Gall, A.A., Dempcy, R., Reed, M.W.,
Meyer, R.B. and Hedgpeth, J. (2000). 3'-minor groove binder-DNA probes
increase sequence specificity at PCR extension temperatures. Nucleic Acids
Research 28, 655-61.

Lakowicz, J.R. (1983). Principles of Fluorescence Spectroscopy, Plenum Press, New
York, chapter 2.

Lie, Y. S. and Petropoulos, C. J. (1998). Advances in quantitative PCR technology: 5'
nuclease assays. Current Opinion Biotechnol 9, 43-48.

Studer, E., Rhyner, C., Lthy, J. and Hbner, P. (1998). Quantitative competitive
PCR for the detection of genetically modified soybean and maize. Zeitschrift fr
Lebensmittel-Untersuchung und -Forschung A 207, 207213.

Thelwell, N., Millington, S., Solinas,

A., Booth, J. and Brown, T. (2000). Mode of
action and application of Scorpion primers to mutation detection. Nucleic Acids
Research 28, 3752-3761.

Tyagi, S. and Kramer, F.R. (1996). Molecular Beacons: Probes that fluoresce upon
hybridisation. Nature Biotechnology 14, 303-308.

Vatilingom, M., Pijnenburg, H., Gendre, F. and Brignon, P. (1999). Real-time
quantitative PCR detection of genetically modified Maximizer maize and Roundup
Ready soybean in some representative foods. Journal of Agricultural Food
Chemistry 47, 52615266.





Session 11

Quantitative Detection of Roundup Ready Soybean
by Real-time PCR

N. Foti

Quantitative Detection of Roundup Ready Soybean by Real-time PCR 2


Table of Contents

Session 11

Quantitative Detection of Roundup Ready Soybean by Real-time
PCR

Experimental 3

Introduction 3

Real-time PCR using the ABI PRISM 7700 3
Real-time PCR using the LightCycler (Roche) 8

References 14


Experimental
Introduction
The following protocols are real-time PCR-based methods for the quantification of a
specific GM soybean line (Roundup Ready soybean) in raw and processed
material. The real-time PCR quantifications are carried out with two different PCR
thermocyclers equipped to detect amplification in real-time by measuring
fluorescence: the ABI PRISM 7700 SDS (Applied Biosystems) and LightCycler
(Roche).
Real-time PCR is used to amplify an endogenous reference target DNA sequence
(that is unique to soybean), plus a DNA target sequence that indicates the presence
of genetically modified soybean (Roundup Ready soybean).
Both assays encompass two independent PCR systems, each with specific DNA
primers and dye-labelled probes. One PCR system detects a GMO-specific target
DNA sequence, the other is an endogenous reference system designed to serve as a
quantitative reference that detects GM and non-GM soybean.

Note: The protocols included in this manual have been chosen for didactical
purposes and should be considered as basic examples of GMO quantification using
the real-time PCR approach. We recommend to periodically reviewing pertinent
sources and literature to acquire information on more recently developed and
validated protocols. Please also note that these protocols have been selected
according to the instrumentation available in our laboratory. The JRC and the WHO
in no way promote the exclusive use of any particular company or brand.
Real-time PCR using the ABI PRISM
7700
Protocol for RR-soybean specific real-time PCR: a multiplex PCR method

This method consists of an amplification/quantification of the lectin reference gene
and a part of the RR soybean inserted cassette using a multiplex PCR assay (two
PCR reactions in the same tube) (Foti et al., 2006). The TaqMan lectin and RR
probes are labelled with the VIC dye and the FAM dye, respectively, making it
possible to detect amplification of more than one target in the same tube. The
reporter dye (FAM) is distinguishable from the VIC as a consequence of their

different maximal emission wavelengths. The ABI PRISM 7700 SDS is able to
detect multiple dyes with distinct emission wavelengths.
The amount of RR-soybean (FAM) dye is normalised to the amount of plant material
(VIC) dye detected in each sample. This produces a C
T
value, which is averaged for
replicate samples. These values are compared to a calibration curve produced from
the C
T
of the known RR-soybean concentration standards (Comparative C
T
method,
or C
T
).
This procedure was successfully applied to various raw materials, ingredients and
foods containing soybean (e.g. feed, soy drink, yoghurt, flour, lecithin etc.).
The analytical performance of the method has been successfully monitored during
several proficiency-testing schemes (e.g. FAPAS, GIPSA).

Equipment and Reagents

ABI PRISM 7700 Sequence Detector System (Applied Biosystems)
MicroAmp Optical 96-Well Reaction Plates (Cat No. N801-0560)
MicroAmp Optical caps (Cat No. N801-0935)
TaqMan Universal PCR Mastermix (Cat No. 4304437) 2X containing: TaqMan
Buffer 2x AmpliTaq Gold DNA Polymerase (5U/l), AmpErase UNG (1U/ml),
dNTPs 200 M with dUTP, Passive Reference 1
Microcentrifuge
Refrigerated centrifuge for 15 ml conical tubes
Micropipettes
Vortex mixer
15 ml polypropylene conical centrifuge tubes
Nuclease-free water
Reference gene specific primers (Le-F and Le-R) and probe (Le-Probe)
Transgene specific primers (RR-F and RR-R) and probe (RR-Probe)

Characteristics of primers and probe for the reference gene

Le-F
Sequence TCC ACC CCC ATC CAC ATT T
Length (bp) 19
Mol. weight 5586.0


Characteristics of primers and probe for the transgene

RR-F
Sequence GCC ATG TTG TTA ATT TGT GCC AT
Length (bp) 23
Mol. Weight 7014

RR-R
Sequence GAA GTT CAT TTC ATT TGG AGA GGA C
Length (bp) 25
Mol. Weight 7712

RR-Probe
Sequence 5-(FAM)-CTT GAA AGA TCT GCT AGA GTC
AGC TTG TCA GCG-(TAMRA)-3'
Length (bp) 33
Mol. Weight 10137


Thaw, mix gently and centrifuge the required amount of components required for the
reaction. Keep thawed reagents on ice.
In one 15 ml centrifuge tube kept on ice, add the following components in the order
mentioned below (except DNA) to prepare the mastermixes. Each DNA extract is
analysed in triplicate. Please Note that four more reaction mixes are prepared to help
calculate pipetting errors due to solution viscosity.

Le-R
Sequence GGC ATA GAA GGT GAA GTT GAA GGA
Length (bp) 24
Mol. Weight 7532
Le-Probe
Sequence 5-(VIC)-AAC CGG TAG CGT TGC CAG CTT
CG-(TAMRA)-3'
Length (bp) 23
Mol. weight 7019.0

Table 1. Preparation of the mastermix for one plate of multiplex PCR assay.

Concentration
in PCR
Mastermix
for reaction
vessel (l)
Mastermix
for one sample
(3 repetitions)
Mastermix
for one plate
(32+4samples)
Sterile, deionised water 18.3 54.9 1976.4
TaqMan Universal Mastermix 2X 1x 25 75 2700
Primer Le-F (20 M) 40 nM 0.1 0.3 10.8
Primer Le-R (20 M) 40 nM 0.1 0.3 10.8
Primer RR-F (20 M) 100 nM 0.25 0.75 27
Primer RR-R (20 M) 100 nM 0.25 0.75 27
Le-Probe (10 M) 100 nM 0.5 1.5 54
RR-Probe (10 M) 100 nM 0.5 1.5 54
DNA 50-250 ng 5 15
TOTAL 50 150

Mix gently and centrifuge briefly.
Prepare one 1.5 ml microcentrifuge tube for each DNA sample to be tested: standard
curve samples (CRM - RR soybean at 0.1, 0.5, 1, 2, and 5%) unknown samples and
control samples (0% RR-soybean, DNA from RR-soybean and No-Template
Control).
Add to each microcentrifuge tube the amount of mastermix needed for 3 repetitions
(135 l mastermix). Add to each tube the required amount of DNA for 3 repetitions
(i.e. 15 l DNA). Vortex each tube at least three times for approx 10 sec. This step is
of particular importance as it helps reduce to a minimum the variability between the
three replicas of each sample.
Spin briefly in a microcentrifuge. Place the 96-well reaction plate in a base and
aliquot 50 l in each well horizontally from left to right. After adding mastermixes to
one vertical row of wells, cover the wells with optical caps using the cap-installing
tool.
Note: do not write on the optical plate and do not touch the cap
Ensure that the loaded mastermix aliquots are in the bottom of the wells, with no
splashes or bubbles on the side or in the caps.
Place the plate into the ABI PRISM 7700 instrument; open a new plate setup
window to assign the sample type to each well: the IPC sample type is associated
with the VIC dye and the UNKN on the FAM dye layer.
Cycle the samples as described in Table 2.

Table 2. Cycling program for the RR-soybean multiplex assay on ABI PRISM 7700 SDS

Set: Real time PCR modus
50 l reaction volume

Step Stage TC Time Acquisition Cycles
1 UNG 50
o
C 120 sec no 1x
2 Initial denaturation 95
o
C 600 sec no 1x
3 Amplification Denaturation 95
o
C 15 sec no 45x
4 Annealing &
Extension
60
o
C 60 sec Measure

Data analysis and interpretation of results

After the run is completed data are analysed using the ABI PRISM 7700 SDS
software to produce C
T
values of each reporter dye for each sample.
It is important to properly number samples in the SDS software Plate Setup window.
Each well should be given a unique number in the Replicate field; replicates of the
same sample should be given the same number.
Analyse the run by selecting analyse from the Analysis menu to automatically
access the amplification plot window; adjust the threshold value for the FAM and VIC
layers.
After analysing the run export the results on an excel file Opening the exported
results file in MicrosoftExcel, a table containing two sets of data corresponding to
the FAM and VIC dye layers appears with C
T
values for each well.
Calculate the C
T
(FAM) and C
T
(VIC) average of each group of replicate to calculate
the C
T
values (C
T FAM
C
T VIC
).
For each sample, %GMO is calculated by analysing the samples C
T
, comparing it
to the set of log (% GMO) and C
T
values obtained from the concentration standards
set.


Real-time PCR using the LightCycler
(Roche)
Protocol for RR-soybean specific real-time PCR

The method consists of an amplification/quantification of the lectin reference gene
and a part of the RR soybean inserted cassette, performed in two independent PCR
reactions (BgVV, EU Tender Report, 2000). The two PCR systems use FAM labelled
probes.
For each sample the amount of GMO soybean specific sequences and the reference
gene (lectin gene) sequence is determined from the appropriate standard curves
prepared for both the transgene and the reference gene. The GMO soybean content
is divided by the reference gene amount to obtain a normalized GMO soybean value.

Equipment and Reagents

Roche LightCycler system
LightCycler Sample Capillaries. Roche, Cat No 1909339
LightCycler Capillaries Adapter. Roche, Cat No 1909312
LightCycler FastStart DNA Master Hybridization Probes. Roche, Cat No 3003248
containing: FastStart Taq DNA Polymerase, dNTP mix (with dUTP instead of dTTP)
and reaction buffer, 10x conc.; sterile water, PCR-grade
Bovine serum albumin (BSA), nuclease free (DNase & RNase free) e.g. Promega
Cat No R9461 (1 g/l)
Platinum Taq DNA Polymerase 5U/l (together with the original 10x buffer and 50
mM MgCl
2
). Invitrogen Life Technologies Cat No 10966026
Microcentrifuge
Micropipettes
Vortex mixer
Nuclease-free water
Reference gene specific primers (GM1-F and GM1-R) and probe (GM1-Probe)
Transgene specific primers (GM2F, GM2-R) and probe (GM2-Probe)


Characteristics of primers and probe for the reference gene

GM1-F
Sequence 5'-CCA GCT TCG CCG CTT CCT TC-3'

GM1-R
Sequence 5'-GAA GGC AAG CCC ATC TGC AAG CC-3'

GM1-Probe
Sequence 5'-(FAM)-CTT CAC CTT CTA TGC CCC TGA CAC -(TAMRA)-3'

Characteristics of primers and probe for the transgene

GM2-R
Sequence 5'-GAG CCA TGT TGT TAA TTT GTG CC-3'

GM2-Probe
Sequence 5'-(FAM)-CAA GCT GAC TCT AGC AGA TCT TTC (TAMRA)-3'

Standard curves

In each run the two standard curves are generated with 5 different DNA standard
dilutions. Single reactions are performed with each calibration standard DNA with
both mastermixes.
Standard curves for total soybean DNA and for GMO sequence quantification are
made with standard DNA solutions at decreasing concentration values starting from
2% RR soybean DNA with TE buffer (0.1 M, pH 8.0). Approximately 100 ng DNA is
used for the first point of the standard curves. Dilutions and concentrations of the
standard curves are summarised in Table 3.

GM2-F
Sequence 5'-CAT TTG GAG AGG ACA CGC TGA-3'

Table 3. Quantity of DNA and dilutions of the standard curves.

DNA amount
(ng)/reaction
Soybean
DNA %
GM DNA % Dilution Factor

STD 1 100 100 2
STD 2 50 50 1 1:2
STD 3 25 25 0.5 1:4
STD 4 12.5 12.5 0.25 1:8
STD 5

6.25 6.25 0.125 1:16


Thaw, mix gently and centrifuge the required amount of components needed for the
run. Keep thawed reagents on ice.
For each system, add the following components in the order mentioned below
(except DNA) to a 1.5 ml microcentrifuge tube on ice to prepare the mastermixes.
Please note that two reaction mixes include an excess volume to considering
pipetting errors due to solution viscosity.

Table 4. Preparation of the mastermix for the GM1 system.

Component
concentration in
PCR
l/reaction
Total l
(for 18
reactions)

Platinum Taq pol.ase Buffer 10x
MgCl
2
(50 mM)
dATP, dGTP, dCTP,dTTP (4 mM)
GM1-F primer (20 M)
GM1-R primer (20 M)
GM1-Probe (10 M)
BSA nuclease free (1 g/l)
Platinum Taq pol.ase (5 U/l)
Nuclease free water
DNA

1x
4 mM
0.8 mM
500 mM
500 nM
200 nM
0.1 mg/ml
0.8 U
#

2
1.6
4
0.5
0.5
0.4
2
0.16
6.85
2

36
28.8
72
9
9
7.2
36
2.9
123.5

Total volume:
18 l+2 l
DNA
324.2 l
(w/o DNA)


Table 5. Preparation of the mastermix for the GM2 system

Component
Concentration in
PCR
l/reaction
Total l
(for 18
reactions)

Platinum Taq pol.ase Buffer 10x
MgCl
2
(50 mM)
dATP, dGTP, dCTP,dTTP (4 mM)
GM2-F primer (20 M)
GM2-R primer (20 M)
GM2 Probe (10 M)
BSA nuclease free (1 g/l)
Platinum Taq pol.ase (5 U/l)
Nuclease free water
DNA

1x
4 mM
0.8 mM
500 mM
500 nM
200 nM
0.1 mg/ml
0.8 U
#

2
1.6
4
0.5
0.5
0.4
2
0.16
6.85
2

36
28.8
72
9
9
7.2
36
2.9
123.5

Total volume:
18 l+2 l
DNA
324.2 l
(w/o DNA)

Mix gently and centrifuge briefly
Prepare two (one for GM1 system and one for GM2 system) 0.5 ml reaction tubes for
each DNA sample to be tested (standard curve samples and unknown samples)
Add to each reaction tube the amount of mastermix needed for 2 repetitions (36 l
mastermix). Add to each tube the proper amount of DNA for 2 repetitions (i.e. 4 l
DNA). Vortex at least three times for approx 10 sec. each tube. This step is important
in order to reduce to a minimum the variability between the replicates of each sample
Place the capillaries in the pre-cooled centrifuge adapter
Pipette 20 l of the mastermix to each capillary according to the scheme provided.
(see Table 6 Plate set up loading order - Standard LightCycler carousel)
Spin down in a microcentrifuge at low speed (ca. 1150 rpm). This step ensures the
concentration of the entire volume of the reaction mix into the tip of the capillary
Transfer the capillaries into the LightCycler (Roche) carousel
Cycle the samples as described in Table 7


Table 6. Plate set up LightCycler carousel-loading order: positions 1 to 16 = GM1
system, positions 17 to 32 = GM2 system. Each DNA sample in duplicate for the reference
gene and for the transgene (GMO) systems

Position
Sample
(%)
Position
Sample
(%)
Position
Sample
(%)
1 STD (100) 13 U2 25 STD (0.125)
2 STD (100) 14 U2 26 STD (0.125)
3 STD (50) 15 NTC 27 U1
4 STD (50) 16 NTC 28 U1
5 STD (25) 17 STD (2) 29 U2
6 STD (25) 18 STD (2) 30 U2
7 STD (12.5) 19 STD (1) 31
NTC
8 STD (12.5) 20 STD (1) 32 NTC
9 STD (6.25) 21 STD (0.5)
10 STD (6.25) 22 STD (0.5)
11 U1 23 STD (0.25)
12 U1 24 STD (0.25)

Table 7. Cycling program for the LightCycler system

Set: slope 20C/sec in all steps.
Fluorescen display mode: F1/1

Denaturation:
Cycles: 1
Type: None Fluorescence Display Mode: F1/1
Segment
Number
Temp. Time Slope 2 Target
Temp.
Step
Size
Step Delay
(Cycles)
Acquisition
Mode
1 96 C 120 sec 20 C/sec 0 C 0 C 0 None
Cycling:
Cycles: 45
Type: Quantification Fluorescence Display Mode: F1/1
Segment
Number
Temp.
Step
Size
Step Delay
(Cycles)
Acquisition
Mode
1 95 C 5 sec 20 C/sec 0 C 0 C 0 None
2 60 C 15 sec 20 C/sec 0 C 0 C 0 Single
3 72 C 15 sec 20 C/sec 0 C 0 C 0 None

Cooling:
Cycles: 1
Type: None Fluorescence Display Mode: F1/1
Segment
Number
Temp.
Step
Size
Step Delay
(Cycles)
Acquisition
Mode
1 40 C 30 sec 20 C/sec 0 C 0 C 0 None


During the run, click on the EDIT SAMPLE button and enter the sample names in the
loading screen. Define all positions (including the calibrator DNA) as "Unknowns".

Data analysis and interpretation of results

For data analysis select Fluorescence F1/F2 in the data analysis front window.
For quantification click the quantification button.
The LightCycler
software offers two different methods for quantification: The

Second Derivative Maximum method and the Fit Points method. For quantification
with the RR-soybean DNA detection kit preferably use the Fit Points method. Use
the following settings: baseline adjustment = Proportional; number of points = 2.
Highlight the standard curve together with all corresponding unknown reactions.
Open the folder Step 2: Noise Band.
Move the noise band to a position of 0,1. The noise band can be moved either
manually using the mouse or by pressing the button below the Chance Graph
Settings button. Using this button the Manual Cursor Adjustment window appears
and the cursor value can be defined as 0.1.
Open the folder Step 3: Analysis.
In Step 3: Analysis the crossing points and the corresponding concentrations of
calibration standards and unknown DNA templates are calculated.
Control the r-value of the standard curve. Values of r -0,98 are acceptable; optimal
r-value = -1.


References
EU Tender Report. (2000). Development of qualitative as well quantitative detection
methods to identify a genetic modification in soybean and maize products. Report
of the EU tender n. XXIV/98/A3/001.

LightCycler Operators Manual, version 3.0 (Roche Molecular Biochemicals).

User Bullettin #2. Relative quantitation of gene expression. ABI PRISM 7700
Sequence Detection System. PE Applied Biosystems, 1997.

User Bullettin #5. Multiplex PCR with TaqM VIC probes .ABI PRISM 7700 Sequence
Detection System. PE Applied Biosystems, 1998.

Foti, N., Onori, R., Donnarumma, E., De Sanctis, B., and Miraglia, M. (2006). Real-
Time PCR multiplex method for the quantification of Roundup Ready soybean in
raw material and processed food. European Food Research and Technology
Journal 222, 209-216.





Session 12

Quantitative Detection of Roundup Ready Soybean
by ELISA

F. Eyquem

Quantitative Detection of Roundup Ready Soybean by ELISA 2


Table of Contents

Session 12

Quantitative Detection of Roundup Ready Soybean by ELISA

Introduction 3

The ELISA technique 7

Experimental 11

References 20


Introduction
The specific immunological detection of a novel protein synthesised by a gene
introduced during transformation constitutes an alternative approach for the
identification of genetically modified plants. It should be noted, however, that genetic
modification is not always specifically directed at the production of a new protein and
does not always result in protein expression levels sufficient for detection purposes.
In addition, certain proteins may be expressed only in specific parts of the plant
(tissue-specific promoters are already being used for specific purposes) or expressed
at different levels in distinct parts or during different phases of physiological
development.
The expression levels of transgene products in plants were reported to be in the
range of 0 to 2% of the total soluble protein, even when strong constitutive promoters
were used to drive expression (Longstaff, 1995). In most cases, however, the
expression levels reported (e.g. for approved GM crops) are lower than the upper
limit of 2% (Hemmer, 1997).
Immunoassays are analytical measurement systems that use antibodies as test
reagents. Antibodies are specific proteins isolated from the serum of animals that
physically bind only to the substance that elicited their production. Antibodies are
made by injecting the substance to be detected (e.g. CP4 EPSPS, the protein that
confers resistance to the herbicide Roundup) into animals such as rabbits and mice,
where cells of the body recognise the substance as foreign and respond by
producing antibodies against it. The antibodies are purified, attached to a detectable
label and then used as reagents to detect the substance of interest.
A prerequisite for the development of immunological detection methods is that highly
specific antibodies directed against the new protein to be detected should be
available. In addition, the sample or the proteins of interest should not be significantly
degraded.
Antibodies are powerful tools for the biologist in the detection and quantification of
antigens in complex mixtures. All immunoassays are based on the specific binding of
antibody to antigen.
Antibody-antigen interactions
When immunologists describe the properties of antibodies as proteins, most would
include a description of the capacity of these molecules to precipitate antigens from
solution, even though antibody precipitation is seldom used any more to isolate or
detect antigens experimentally and antibodies rarely precipitate antigens in vivo,

except in some autoimmune diseases. The instructional value of the antibody
precipitation reaction, as illustrated in Figure 1, is that it neatly embodies so many of
the fundamental and universal properties of antibody molecules. This technique
demonstrates, among other things, that:
serum (IgG) antibodies are bivalent in their reactions with antigen and have the
capacity to cross-link antigens;
antigens are often multivalent in their interactions with antibodies;
serum antibodies are typically polyclonal in nature; and
antibodies are highly specific in terms of the structures they recognise on
antigenic molecules.

Figure 1. A precipitation curve for a system of one antigen and its antibodies

The plot of the amount of antibody precipitated versus increasing antigen
concentration (at constant total antibody) reveals three zones:
an Antibody-excess zone in which precipitation is inhibited and excess antibody
can be detected in the supernatant.
an Equivalence zone of maximal precipitation in which antibody and antigen form
large insoluble complexes (shaded in blue) and neither antibody nor antigen can be
detected in the supernatant.

an Antigen-excess zone in which precipitation is inhibited and excess antigen can
be detected in the supernatant.
While the precipitation reaction is particularly well suited for characterising the
interactions between polyclonal antibodies and multivalent antigens, it is generally
not very useful for characterising the interactions between antigens and monoclonal
antibodies, unless the antigens exhibit multiple identical epitopes (like the repeating
carbohydrate structures found in polysaccharides, for example). Only then will a
mono-specific monoclonal antibody be able to cross-link and precipitate antigen.
However, monoclonal antibodies are typically characterised by more refined types of
measurements that provide detailed information regarding the antibody-antigen
interaction, such as the equilibrium constant and the kinetic off- and on-rates.
The utility of antibodies for detecting and isolating antigens can hardly be overstated,
given the wide spectrum of extremely powerful antibody applications developed over
the years. The utility of antibodies is also greatly enhanced by their relative stability in
various chemical modification reactions, which alter antibody structure without
destroying their capacity to bind antigens. Antibodies have been chemically tagged
with fluorescent, magnetic, radioactive and assorted other compounds as a way of
facilitating antigen detection or isolation under a variety of experimental conditions.
How can monoclonal antibodies be prepared
Substances foreign to the body, such as disease-causing bacteria and viruses and
other infectious agents known as antigens, are recognised by the body's immune
system as invaders. Our natural defences against these infectious agents are
antibodies, proteins that seek out the antigens and help destroy them.
Antibodies have two very useful characteristics. First, they are extremely specific;
that is, each antibody binds to and attacks one particular antigen. Second, some
antibodies, once activated by the occurrence of a disease, continue to confer
resistance against that disease.
The second characteristic of antibodies makes it possible to develop vaccines. A
vaccine is a preparation of killed or weakened bacteria or viruses that, when
introduced into the body, stimulates the production of antibodies against the antigens
it contains.
It is the first trait of antibodies, their specificity, which makes monoclonal antibody
technology so valuable. Not only can antibodies be used therapeutically, to protect
against disease; they can also help to diagnose a wide variety of illnesses and can
detect the presence of drugs, viral and bacterial products and other unusual or
abnormal substances in the blood.

Given such a diversity of uses for these disease-fighting substances, their production
in pure quantities has long been the focus of scientific investigation. The conventional
method was to inject a laboratory animal with an antigen and then, after antibodies
had been formed, collect those antibodies from the blood serum (antibody-containing
blood serum is called antiserum). There are two problems with this method: it yields
antiserum that contains undesired substances and it provides a very small amount of
usable antibody.
Monoclonal antibody technology allows the production of large amounts of pure
antibodies by using cells that produce antibodies naturally and a class of cells that
can grow continually in cell culture. If we form a hybrid that combines the
characteristic of "immortality" with the ability to produce the desired substance, we
have, in effect, a factory to produce antibodies that works around the clock.
In monoclonal antibody technology, tumour cells that can replicate endlessly are
fused with mammalian cells that produce an antibody. The result of this cell fusion is
a "hybridoma," which will continually produce antibodies. These antibodies are called
monoclonal because they come from only one type of cell, the hybridoma cell;
antibodies produced by conventional methods, on the other hand, are derived from
preparations containing many kinds of cells and hence are called polyclonal. An
example of how monoclonal antibodies are derived is described below.
Monoclonal antibody production
A myeloma is a tumour of the bone marrow that can be adapted to grow permanently
in cell culture. When myeloma cells were fused with antibody-producing mammalian
spleen cells, it was found that the resulting hybrid cells, or hybridomas, produced
large amounts of monoclonal antibody. This product of cell fusion combined the
desired qualities of the two different types of cells: the ability to grow continually and
the ability to produce large amounts of pure antibody.
Because selected hybrid cells produce only one specific antibody, they are more
pure than the polyclonal antibodies produced by conventional techniques. They are
potentially more effective than conventional drugs in fighting disease, since drugs
attack not only the foreign substance but the body's own cells as well, sometimes
producing undesirable side effects such as allergic reactions. Monoclonal antibodies
attack the target molecule and only the target molecule, with no or greatly diminished
side effects.


The ELISA technique
Definition
Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay: any enzyme immunoassay utilising an
enzyme-labelled immunoreactant (antigen or antibody) and an immunosorbent
(antigen or antibody bound to a solid support). A variety of methods (e.g. competitive
binding between the labelled reactant and unlabelled unknown) may be used to
measure the unknown concentration.
ELISA (Clark and Adams, 1977) relies on specific interactions between antibodies
and antigens. The key reagents in ELISA are the antibodies, which are soluble
proteins produced by the immune system in response to infection by a foreign
substance (called antigen). In the case of detection of GMOs, the antigen can be
the newly synthesised protein.
ELISA has been widely applied to evaluate, at experimental stage, the expression
level of the protein(s) synthesised by the newly introduced gene. Information
regarding production and use of specific antibodies can be therefore found in many
articles describing the developments of transgenic plants (Mohapatra

et al., 1999).

Only a few specific antibodies, directed against proteins that are the products of
transgenes used in approved genetically engineered crops, are commercially
available: some examples are the antibodies against the nptII-gene product, NPTII,
or APH(3')II and against the product of the gus gene.
There are 3 different methods to perform an ELISA Test:

An ELISA-based method for the specific detection of Roundup Ready soybean was
developed, tested and validated by Lipp et al. (2000).
The method is based on the use of specific antibodies directed against the protein
CP4-EPSPS (5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase, enzyme from the
Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4) (Padgette et al., 1995), which is the protein conferring
tolerance against the herbicide Roundup in the Roundup Ready soybean.
Preliminary results indicate that the method (performed by using a commercialised
ELISA kit) is able to detect the presence of GMOs in raw soybean material at
concentrations ranging between 0.3% and 5%.

Principle
A direct sandwich Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA) is used for the
detection of the CP4 EPSPS protein as shown in the figures below:

The surface of a microtiter plate is coated with a specific monoclonal capture
antibody.

When the sample of interest is added, the capture antibody binds the antigen.
Unbound components of the sample are removed by washing.

After washing, a polyclonal antibody, covalently linked to horseradish peroxidase
(HRP) is added, which is specific for a second antigenic site on the bound CP4
EPSPS protein.

Coated Surface
Y Monoclonal antibody
Coated Surface
Antigen
Coated Surface
HRP
Detector Antibody


After washing, a tetramethylbenzidine chromogen for horseradish peroxidase is
added. The horseradish peroxidase generates a colour signal, which is proportional
to the concentration of antigen in a linear range. To stop the colour development a
stop solution is added. The degree of colour produced is measured at a wavelength
of 450 nm.

Coated Surface
TM
TM

Experimental
(GMO Food Ingredient Testing, Soya kit Users Guide (1999). Strategic Diagnostics,
Inc., Rev. 052099, Vers. 1.8.)
1

Introduction
The following protocol specifies an ELISA-method for the determination of the CP4
EPSPS protein expressed in Roundup Ready Soybean in raw agricultural
commodities and products like soybean flours and soy protein isolates.
The method is applicable to samples where little or no treatment has been carried out
and thus the CP4 EPSPS protein is not denatured. For example, the temperature at
which food ingredients are processed may impact the ability of protein detection.
Data indicate that processing temperatures of no more than 65C for no longer than
60 min, allow reliable protein detection.
The method has been validated for the detection of CP4 EPSPS protein and can be
used for the determination of the concentration of the protein in the sample over the
range of 0.3% to 5% (w/w) using specific reference material. The kit can also be run
at lower detection levels of 0.05% to 0.3% using a modified protocol.

Equipment

15 ml polypropylene conical centrifuge tubes
12 X 75 mm glass test tubes
Plastic wrap or aluminium foil
Plastic tape (for manual plate washing) or automatic plate washer
Wash bottles, e.g. of 500 ml
Precision pipettes capable of delivering 20 l to 500 l
Vortex mixer
Weigh boats or equivalent
Spatulas
Balance capable of 0.01 g measurement

1
The kit described in this Session was the only validated protocol commercially available at the time
the training courses were organized and this Manual prepared. The JRC and the WHO do not
promote any particular brand of commercially available kits.

Centrifuge capable of 5000 to 10000 rpm
Microtiter plate reader capable of reading absorbance at 450 nm
Incubator oven capable of maintaining 37C
Sieve of aperture size of 450 m, or equivalent
Sieve of aperture size of 150 m (100 mesh), or equivalent
Multi-channel pipette, e.g. of 50 l to 300 l (optional)
Reagent reservoirs for multi-channel dispensing (optional)
Automated plate washer (optional)
Test tube rack for 15 ml centrifuge tubes (optional)

Reagents
General
During the analysis, unless otherwise stated, use only reagents of recognised
analytical grade and deionised or distilled water.
Any deviation from the defined performance criteria may indicate a lack of reagent
stability. If the substrate components have already changed colour from clear to blue,
this reagent should be discarded. Turbid buffer solutions should not be used.
All kit components should be stored at approximately 2C to 8C. The shelf life of the
kit components is indicated by the expiry date. Based on accelerated stability testing,
the expiry date for the test kit has been set as 9 months at approximately 2C to 8C.
The antibody conjugate soya conjugate stock solution and the antibody conjugate
working solution should be stored at 2C to 8C until the expiry date of the kit. The
diluted working wash buffer should be stored at approximately 2C to 8C and not
longer than the expiry date of the kit.
Reagents usually provided with the test kit
Soya extraction buffer, sodium borate buffer, pH 7.5
Soya assay buffer, PBS, Tween 20, bovine serum albumin, pH 7.4
Coated strip wells (12 strips, each containing 8 wells coated with the
monoclonal capture antibodies and 1 strip holder)
Soya conjugate, rabbit anti-CP4 EPSPS protein, lyophilised
Soya conjugate diluent, 10% heat inactivated mouse serum
Chromogenic substrate, K-Blue
TM
, tetramethylbenzidine (TMB), hydrogen
peroxide, 5% dimethylformamide as base solvent
Stop solution, 0.5% sulfuric acid

10 fold wash buffer concentrate, PBS, Tween 20, pH 7.1
Negative and positive reference standards

Procedure
Limitation of the procedure
This ELISA GM-test system is limited to samples where the expression of the CP4
EPSPS protein can be correlated with the level of GM material present in the
reference standards used.
The ELISA test kit is designed to give optimum performance at ambient temperatures
of between 15C to 30C. The absorbance of the highest reference standard should
be greater than 0.8 and should not fall outside the linear range of the spectrometer
(the upper limit varies from spectrometer to spectrometer). It is important to consider
that the OD values rise more rapidly at temperature higher than 30C. Therefore, if
temperatures are high, a reduced substrate incubation time will be necessary. At low
temperatures (less than 15C) the substrate incubation time should be increased.
Measures to avoid contamination during sample preparation
General. The ELISA GMO test system is an extremely sensitive technique capable
of detecting very small quantities of GM contamination. For this reason it is
imperative that all equipment used to process soya samples be thoroughly cleaned
between sample batches. The following procedures involve a first step of physical
removal of as much particulate material as possible. The second step, a wash with
alcohol, is to denature the sample and thus render it unreactive in the assay of any
GM protein that might have remained on the equipment.

Grinder or blender cleaning. Brush clean with a soft bristle brush. Periodically wash
brush and soak in an alcohol solution. Dry brush before subsequent use. Wipe with a
soft cloth or laboratory towel.
Rinse with alcohol, this can be stored and dispensed from a spray or squirt bottle.
Two rinses or sprays are recommended. Then rinse thoroughly with water. Air dry or,
if rapid reuse is required, dry using commercial hair dryer.

Sieve cleaning. Sieves tend to become caked with soya powder. Sharply tap sieve
on hard surface to dislodge caked material.

Brush with clean soft bristle brush. Periodically wash brush and soak in an alcohol
solution for at least 1 min. Dry brush before subsequent use. Wipe with soft cloth.
Soak in alcohol for at least 5 min and rinse thoroughly with water. Air dry or, if rapid
reuse is required, dry using commercial hair dryer.
An alternative method would be to use an ultrasonic bath followed by air-drying.

Cleanliness of work area. Cleanliness of the work area is also important. Since the
assay is very sensitive, a tiny GM positive dust contamination of the assay tube might
render a false positive result. Avoid soya dust contamination in the work area. Do not
allow soya dust from one processing to contaminate equipment to be used in a
subsequent processing. For optimum performance run assay in a room separated
from the facility where sample grinding and preparation is conducted to avoid
potential dust contamination.
Sample preparation
A homogeneous incremental sub-sample should be taken from the laboratory
sample.
If the sample is raw soya beans, then at least 500 g should be placed in an
appropriate blender and ground for approx. 3 min or until fine enough to pass through
the sieves. For quantitative analysis, a particle size of less than 150 m should be
obtained and of less than 450 m for qualitative analysis. To avoid contamination,
care should be taken during the sieving step. Furthermore, care should be taken to
avoid excessive heating. The actions of the blender will both mix and grind the
sample. From the ground material a sub-sample of approximately 100 g should be
taken and passed through a sieve of 450-m-pore size (40 mesh). At least 90% of
this sub-sample should pass through the 450-m sieve. For a qualitative assay, this
material can be used directly, for a quantitative assay the sieved material should be
further sieved using a sieve of 150-m-pore size. The material passing through the
450-m sieve has been shown to be homogeneous and so it is necessary to sieve
only enough material to provide a final sample through the 150-m sieve. It is
sufficient to pass only the amount of material that is necessary for the final sample.
Other types of samples should be treated equivalently although smaller sample sizes
may be used.
Assay procedure
Allow all reagents to warm to room temperature before using.

Remove the coated strips and strip holder from the foil bag. Always reseal the foil
bag each time after removing the appropriate number of strips. Ten wells are
required for reference standards and assay blanks. Each plate shall have its own
standards and controls. If using manual washing, tape the edges of all strips needed
for a run to the strip holder to prevent strips from accidentally falling out of the strip
holder during the washing steps.
Preparation of antibody conjugate
Antibody conjugate stock solution. Pipette 1 ml Soya Conjugate Diluent from
Soya Conjugate bottle into the Soya Conjugate vial. Vortex for approximately 10 s.

Antibody conjugate working solution. Transfer 240 l of reconstituted Soya
Conjugate back into the Soya Conjugate Diluent bottle. Label the bottle with current
date and mix by inverting 20 times.
Preparation of wash buffer
Allow the 10X Wash Buffer Concentrate to come to room temperature.
Dilute the 10X Wash Buffer Concentrate in deionised water to prepare the working
wash buffer (e.g. 50 ml 10X Wash Buffer Concentrate into 450 ml deionised water).
Add to Automatic Plate Washer or Wash Bottle.
Extraction of samples and reference standards
The samples and negative and positive reference standards are extracted under the
same conditions in duplicate, described as follows.
When weighing samples, weigh out each reference standard in increasing order of
concentration and then the samples.
Weigh out 0.5 g 0.01 g of each reference standard and the sample into individual
15 ml polypropylene centrifuge tubes. To avoid contamination clean the spatula
between each weighing.
Add 4.5 ml of soya extraction buffer into each tube containing 0.5 g sample and
vortex for 10 s.
Centrifuge the mixtures at approximately 5000 rpm for 15 min.
Using a transfer pipette, carefully remove supernatant without aspirating particulate
matter and place supernatant into a clean, labelled 15 ml centrifuge tube.
Prior to starting the assay, dilute the sample extracts and the reference standard
extracts with soya assay buffer according to Table 1.

Protein extracts should be stored at 2C to 8C, but not for longer than one working
day.

Table 1. Dilution ranges according to the matrix

Matrix Dilution
Soybean
Soy flour
Defatted soy flour
Protein isolate
1:300
1:300
1:300
1:10

Dilution of sample extracts
For the extracted negative control, for each extracted positive reference and for each
sample, two 12 X 75-mm test tubes are required to accomplish the dilution.
Pipette 280 l of the Soya Assay Buffer into one of the two 12 x 75-mm test tubes.
Pipette 380 l of the Soya Assay Buffer into the other 12 x 75-mm test tube.
Label the 280 l tube 1:15 and label the 380 l tube 1:300.
Pipette 20 l of each sample extract into the tube labelled 1:15 and vortex.
Transfer 20 l from the mixed 1:15 tube to the tube labelled 1:300 and vortex.
Repeat steps for the negative control, each positive reference and the sample
extracts.
ELISA immunoassay procedure
General
The ELISA assay kit can be run in different formats using any number of the 8-well
strips. It is recommended to follow a randomised loading scheme.
All reaction wells should be run in duplicate and the mean absorbance value of each
well is calculated. Each run consists of the assay buffer blank, the negative control
and the positive reference standards.
When an assay has been started, all steps should be completed without interruption.
Sample addition
Add 100 l of diluted extracts and the assay blank to the appropriate wells.
Use separate disposable tips for each pipetting step to avoid cross-contamination.
Cover plate with plastic wrap or aluminium foil to prevent contamination and
evaporation.

Sample incubation
Incubate microtiter plate at 37C for 1 h.
Washing
Wash 3 times with 300 l wash buffer.
Manual washing. Empty the wells by inverting over a sink or suitable waste
container. Using a 500 ml wash bottle containing working wash solution, fill each well
to the top, allow to stand for 60 s, then empty the plate as described above. Repeat
the washing step for a total of 3 times. Remove residual liquid and bubbles by
tapping upside down on several layers of paper towels.
Prevent the strips from falling out of the frame by securing with adhesive tape.
Automatic washing. At the end of the incubation period aspirate the contents of all
wells using a Microwell washer, then fill wells with working wash buffer. Repeat the
aspiration/fill step for a total of 3 times. Finally, use the Microwell washer to aspirate
all wells, and then tap the inverted plate onto a stack of paper towels to remove
residual droplets of wash buffer and bubbles.
Do not let well dry out, as it may affect assay performance.
Inadequate washing will cause erroneous results. Whether using manual or
automated washer it is important to ascertain that each assay well is washed with
identical volumes to all other wells.
Addition of antibody conjugate
Add 100 l of antibody conjugate working solution to each well.
Cover the plate to prevent contamination and evaporation.
Incubation
Incubate the microtiter plate at 37C for 1 h.
Washing
At the end of the incubation period, repeat the washing steps as described above.
Substrate addition
Add 100 l of the colour solution to each well.
Gently mix the plate and incubate for 10 min at ambient temperature.
The addition of chromogenic substrate should be completed without interruption.
Maintain the same sequence and time interval during the pipette step. Protect the
microtiter plate from sunlight, otherwise colour intensity is influenced.

Stop solution addition
At the end of the incubation period, add 100 l of stop solution to each well, pipette
the stop solution in the same sequence as the colour reagent was added.
The addition of stop solution should be completed without interruption. Protect the
microtiter plate from sunlight, otherwise colour intensity is influenced.
Absorbance reading
Using a microplate reader fitted with a convenient filter for reading at 450 nm,
measure the absorbance of each assay well.
All readings should be completed within 30 min of adding the stop solution.
Record the results obtained and calculate the mean absorbance values or use a
computer programme.
Evaluation
Standard values should be used to develop a standard curve. The value from the
assay blank should be subtracted from all values for samples and reference
standards. The average corrected values from each duplicate reference point should
be used to create a standard curve. The average data from each duplicate sample
should then be used to insert a concentration from this curve.
Run accept/reject criteria
Each run shall meet the accept/reject criteria in the procedure to be valid. The run
consists of the following: assay blank, the extraction of each GM positive reference
standard, the negative control and each unknown sample. All protein extracts and the
assay blank will be run in duplicates. If a run does not meet the assay acceptance
criteria, the entire run shall be repeated.

Run Criteria
Assay buffer blank A450nm < 0,30
0% GM Standard A450nm < 0,30
2.5% Reference A450nm > 0,8
All positive standards CV of duplicates < 15%
Unknown samples CV of duplicates < 20%


Flowchart
Flowchart Sample and Standard Reference Extraction

Procedure Volume/Weight Description
Weigh out 0.5 g Weigh out samples, assay blank, reference
standards
Addition 4.5 ml Addition of extraction buffer
Mixing Mix the sample with extraction buffer until it
becomes homogeneous
Centrifugation 5000 rpm Centrifuge the sample at 5000 rpm for 15 min
Remove supernatant and place it into a clean tube
Dilution 1:300 or 1:10
according to the
material investigated
Dilute the samples and reference standards

Flowchart ELISA Immunoassay Procedure

Procedure Volume Description
Addition 100 l Pipette diluted extracts of samples, reference standards and
assay buffer blank into appropriate assay well
Incubation Incubate 1 h at 37C
Washing Wash 3 times with wash buffer
Addition 100 l Dispense antibody conjugate into each assay well
Incubation Incubate 1 h at 37C
Washing Wash 3 times with wash buffer
Addition 100 l Dispense colour solution into each well
Incubation Incubate for 10 min at ambient temperature
Addition 100 l Dispense stop solution into each assay well
Absorbance
measurement
Measure absorbance value of each assay well in plate reader
at 450 nm


References
Clark, M.F. and Adams, A.N. (1977). Characteristics of the microplate method of
enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the detection of plant viruses. Journal of
General Virology 34, 475483.

Hemmer, W. (1997). Foods Derived from Genetically Modified Organisms and
Detection Methods. Biosafety Research and Assessment of Technology Impacts
of the Swiss Priority Program Biotechnology Report 2/97, 61 pages.
http://www.bats.ch/bats/publikationen/1997-2_gmo/index.php (accessed January
2010)

Lipp, M., Anklam, E. and Stave, J.W. (2000). Validation of an immunoassay for
detection and quantification of a genetically modified soybean in food and food
fractions using reference materials. Journal of AOAC International 83, 919927.

Longstaff, M., Edmonds, H.S. and Newell, C.A. (1995). An improved method for the
detection and quantification of recombinant protein in transgenic plants. Plant
Molecular Biology Reporter 13, 363368.

Mohapatra, U., Mccabe, M.S., Power, J.B., Schepers, F., Vanderarend, A. and
Davey, M.R. (1999). Expression of the bar gene confers herbicide resistance in
transgenic lettuce. Transgenic Research 8, 3344.

Padgette, S.R., Kolacz, K.H., Delannay, X., Re, D.B., LaVallee, B.J., Tinius, C.N.,
Rhodes, W.K., Otero, Y.I., Barry, G.F., Eichholtz, D.A., Peschke, V.M., Nida, D.L.,
Taylor, N.B. and Kishore, G.M. (1995). Development, identification, and
characterization of a glyphosate-tolerant soybean line. Crop Science 35, 1451
1461.
Additional Reading
Brett, G.M., Chambers, S.J., Huang, L. and Morgan, M.R.A. (1999). Design and
development of immunoassays for detection of proteins. Food Control 10, 401
406.


Commission Directive 79/700/EEC of 24 July 1979 establishing Community methods
of sampling for the official control of pesticide residues in and on fruit and
vegetables. OJ L 239, 22.9.1979, p. 24.

Rogan, G.J. Dudin, Y.A., Lee, T.C., Magin, K.M., Astwood, J.D., Bhakta, N.S., Leach,
J.N., Sanders, P.R. and Fuchs, R.L. (1999). Immunodiagnostic methods for
detection of 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase in Roundup Ready
soybeans. Food Control 10, 407414.

Stave, J.W. (1999). Detection of new or modified proteins in novel foods derived from
GMO - future needs. Food Control 10, 367374.

Van der Hoeven, C., Dietz, A. and Landsmann, J. (1994). Variability of organ-
specific gene expression in transgenic tobacco plants. Transgenic Research 3,
159165.





Appendix

Example of work programme
(Base for a one-week course)

M. Querci

Example of work programme 2

The Analysis of Food Samples for the Presence of Genetically Modified Organisms Appendix

1
ST
DAY MONDAY

9:00 am Introduction to the course, presentation of the organizers and participants

9:30 am Theory: Introduction on the general procedures for GMO detection and
course content

PREPARATION OF SAMPLES: DNA EXTRACTION

10:00 am Experimental: DNA extraction following the CTAB method (1
st
part)

10:30 am Coffee break

11:00 am Theory: Gel electrophoresis for nucleic acids analysis

Experimental: Preparation of agarose gels

12:00 pm Experimental: DNA extraction following the CTAB method (2
nd
part)

1:00 pm Lunch

2:00 pm Experimental: DNA extraction following the CTAB method (3
rd
part)

3:15 pm Experimental: Sample loading of agarose gels

4:00 pm Coffee break

4:20 pm Theory: General consideration on PCR lab set up. Troubleshooting, etc

5:20 pm Experimental: Interpretation of agarose gels


2
ND
DAY TUESDAY

QUALITATIVE PCR

9:00 am Theory: Introduction to the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) and to the use
of PCR for the detection of transgenic maize and soybean

9:30 am Experimental: PCR for transgenic MON810 maize and Roundup Ready
soybean
Plant specific: detection of the zein and lectin genes


10:40 am Preparation of agarose gels

11:00 am Seminar: Sampling and validation: basic concepts

12:30 pm Lunch

2:00 pm Sample loading of agarose gels

2:30 pm Theory: Characteristics of Roundup Ready soybean and MON810 maize
and introduction to GMO-specific nested PCR

3:15 pm Interpretation of agarose gels (zein and lectin specific PCR)


4:15 pm Experimental: PCR for transgenic MON810 maize and Roundup Ready
soybean
GMO specific: detection of the 35S promoter and nos terminator.

5:00 pm Seminar: Introduction to European legislation on GMOs


3
RD
DAY WEDNESDAY

QUALITATIVE PCR

9:00 am Experimental: Nested PCR for the specific detection of transgenic MON810
maize and Roundup Ready soybean (1
st
PCR reaction)

10:00 am Preparation of agarose gels


11:00 am Seminar: GMO testing and analytical quality assurance.

12:00 pm Sample loading of agarose gels (35S promoter and nos terminator PCR)

12:30 pm Lunch

1:30 pm Experimental: Nested PCR for the specific detection of transgenic MON810
maize and Roundup Ready soybean (2
nd
PCR reaction)

2:00 pm Interpretation of agarose gels (35S promoter and nos terminator PCR)

3:00 pm Experimental: Preparation of agarose gels


3:45 pm Experimental: Sample loading of agarose gels (nested PCR)

4:00 pm Theory: Introduction to real-time PCR (RT-PCR) for GMO detection and
quantification

5:30 pm Experimental: Interpretation of agarose gels (transgenic MON810 maize and
Roundup Ready soybean specific PCR)


4
TH
DAY THURSDAY

QUANTITATIVE REAL-TIME PCR (RT-PCR)

9:00 am Experimental: DNA quantification and preparation of samples for real-time
PCR (RT-PCR)

9:30 am Experimental: Real-time PCR (RT-PCR) for the specific detection of
transgenic Roundup Ready soybean using
The LightCycler (Roche) (Group 1)
The ABI PRISM 7700 (Applied Biosystems) (Group 2)

Coffee break

1:00 pm Lunch

2:00 pm Experimental: Real-time PCR (RT-PCR) for the specific detection of Roundup
Ready soybean using
The LightCycler (Roche) (Group 2)
The ABI PRISM 7700 (Applied Biosystems) (Group 1)

3:30 pm Theory: Data analysis: Introduction to some statistical means


5:00 pm Experimental: Continuation of real-time PCR (RT-PCR) for the specific
detection of transgenic Roundup Ready soybean



5
TH
DAY FRIDAY

QUANTITATIVE DETECTION OF ROUNDUP READY SOYBEAN USING ELISA

9:00 am Theory: Serological approach for the detection of GMOs

9:20 am Experimental: ELISA 1
st
part


10:30 am Seminar: Serological approach for GMO detection.

11:30 am Experimental: ELISA 2
nd
part

12:00 pm Lunch

1:00 pm Experimental: ELISA 3
rd
part

2:00 pm Interpretation of results

3:00 pm Seminar: Areas of international negotiations on the safe use of Genetically
Modified Organisms

4:00 pm General discussion and conclusions

European Commission

DG Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection
Title: Training Course on the Analysis of Food Samples for the Presence of Genetically Modified
Organisms - User Manual
Edited by M. Querci, M. Jermini and G. Van den Eede
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
2006 229 pp. 21 x 29,7cm
ISBN 92-79-02242-3

Abstract
The Institute for Health and Consumer Protection of the Joint Research Centre of the European
Commission and the Food Safety Programme within the European Centre for Environment and Health
- Rome Division (ECR) of the World Health Organization have jointly organised a series of training
courses on The Analysis of Food Samples for the Presence of Genetically Modified Organisms.
The Joint Research Centre gives scientific and technical support to EU policies by collaborating with
EC Directorates General and by interacting with European Institutions, Organizations and Industries
through networking with Member State laboratories. The overall task of the WHOs ECR is to provide
support in a complete and coordinated way to both decision-makers and to European citizens in the
environmental health field. These training courses are part of collaboration between both Institutions to
promote food safety related issues in the WHO European Region, within and beyond actual EU
borders, taking into special consideration EU Accession Countries, as well as Central and Eastern
Countries with transitional economies.
The scope of the training courses is to assist staff of control laboratories to become accustomed with
molecular detection techniques, and to help them adapt their facilities and work programmes to
include analyses that comply with worldwide regulatory acts in the field of biotechnology. The courses
are intended to teach molecular detection techniques to laboratory personnel with a good level of
analytical knowledge, but with no or little expertise in this specific domain.
The Joint Research Centre has been committed to providing training in detection and quantification of
GMOs and, besides the training courses, it offers, and has offered in the past, individual training for
specific needs. Training in this topic has been frequently requested due to its importance according to
the increasing need to comply with the current and developing European legislative framework.
Over the years, the Biotechnology and GMOs Unit has developed a profound knowledge of the
different aspects related to GMO detection and quantification, and has designed, adapted or validated
advanced methods for their detection and quantification.
Knowledge of these techniques has been transferred to collaborating laboratories through
publications, collaborative projects, individual training or specific courses. Technical details have also
been provided to trainees as oral presentations or brief written outlines. Aware of the need for a
permanent source of information, the Biotechnology and GMOs Unit staff developed this manual,
which describes some of the techniques used in our laboratory.
The following areas are covered throughout the courses:
- DNA extraction from raw and processed materials
- Screening of foodstuffs for the presence of GMOs by simple Polymerase Chain Reaction and
by nested Polymerase Chain Reaction
- Quantification of GMOs in ingredients by real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction
- Quantification of GMOs in ingredients by the Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay
This Manual has been prepared at the Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health and Consumer
Protection (IHCP) as background information for course participants and is intended to provide the
theoretical and practical information on methodologies and protocols currently used. The subject
matter covers a wide variety of techniques for GMOs detection, identification, characterisation, and
quantification, and includes theoretical information considered important background information for
anyone wishing to enter and work in the field of GMO detection.

Mission of the JRC

The mission of the JRC is to provide customer-driven scientific and technical support for
the conception, development, implementation and monitoring of EU policies. As a service
of the European Commission, the JRC functions as a reference centre of science and
technology for the Union. Close to the policy-making process, it serves the common
interest of the Member States, while being independent of special interests, whether
private or national.

L
B
-
X
1
-
0
6
-
0
5
1
-
E
N
-
C

Analysis of Food Samples For Presence of GMO

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis of Food Samples For Presence of GMO

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis of Food Samples For Presence of GMO

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION

REGIONAL OFFICE FOR EUROPE

software offers two different methods for quantification: The

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.