Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 4, 2025

A Duplex Digital PCR Assay for Simultaneous Quantification of the Enterococcus spp. and the Human Fecal-associated HF183 Marker in Waters
Published on: March 9, 2016
Development and assessment of a duplex droplet digital PCR method for quantification of GM rice Kemingdao
Jun Li1, Shanshan Zhai1, Hongfei Gao1
1Key Laboratory of Biology and genetic improvement of oil crops of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Oil Crops Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Wuhan, 430062, Hubei, China.
Abstract:
The implementation of genetically modified organism (GMO) labeling policies requires accurate quantitative methods to measure the GMO content in test samples. A Kemingdao/phospholipase D (KMD/PLD) duplex ddPCR method was established with rice genomic DNA (gDNA) of homozygous KMD as template by optimizing the annealing temperature and cycle number. Duplex ddPCR showed a linear response over the dynamic range from 68 to 175,000 copies, covering four orders of magnitude. The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) for duplex ddPCR were determined to be 9 copies and 34 copies of the rice haploid genome, respectively. A very high dilution factor would result in unacceptable bias and coefficients of variation for determining copy number of the gDNA solution, and more than 1000 copies of the DNA template in one reaction is preferred to obtain accurate quantitative results by duplex PCR. Five blinded DNA samples with copy number ratio of 10%, 5%, 1%, 0.1%, and 0.05%, and three blinded real-life matrix samples with mass fraction of 5%, 1%, and 0.5% were quantified by duplex ddPCR, simplex ddPCR, and qPCR. These three methods all gave comparable GMO content and copy numbers within the required precision, but the duplex ddPCR showed the narrowest uncertainty interval and provided the highest precision in comparison to simplex ddPCR and qPCR. The ddPCR is a more appealing and reliable technology for the accurate quantification of GMO content than simplex ddPCR and qPCR considering the uncertainty and precision of quantitative results, the time consumption of generating droplets, and the cost of ddPCR reagents.

