Limits...
Applicability of three alternative instruments for food authenticity analysis: GMO identification.

Burrell A, Foy C, Burns M - Biotechnol Res Int (2011)

Bottom Line: Ensuring foods are correctly labelled for ingredients derived from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is an issue facing manufacturers, retailers, and enforcement agencies.This study examines the fitness for purpose of the application of three laboratory electrophoresis instruments (Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100, Lab901 TapeStation, and Shimadzu MCE-202 MultiNA) for the detection of GMOs using PCR based on a previously validated protocol.Whilst minor differences in the performance characteristics of bias and precision were observed, all three instruments demonstrated their applicability in using this protocol for screening of GMO ingredients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Molecular and Cell Biology, LGC, Queens Road, Teddington, Middlesex TW11 0LY, UK.

ABSTRACT
Ensuring foods are correctly labelled for ingredients derived from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is an issue facing manufacturers, retailers, and enforcement agencies. DNA approaches for the determination of food authenticitys often use the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and PCR products can be detected using capillary or gel electrophoresis. This study examines the fitness for purpose of the application of three laboratory electrophoresis instruments (Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100, Lab901 TapeStation, and Shimadzu MCE-202 MultiNA) for the detection of GMOs using PCR based on a previously validated protocol. Whilst minor differences in the performance characteristics of bias and precision were observed, all three instruments demonstrated their applicability in using this protocol for screening of GMO ingredients.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Electropherogram and “gel-like” image of positive control on the Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100. The x-axis on the electropherogram represents amplicon size (bp), whist the y-axis represents the measurement response of fluorescence units (FUs). Amplicons of interest in order of size (bp) are lower marker (15), Zein (80), Lectin (90), CaMV (108) and combined CaMV 35s promoter/NOS terminator (131) amplicons, and the upper marker (1500).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3065168&req=5

fig3: Electropherogram and “gel-like” image of positive control on the Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100. The x-axis on the electropherogram represents amplicon size (bp), whist the y-axis represents the measurement response of fluorescence units (FUs). Amplicons of interest in order of size (bp) are lower marker (15), Zein (80), Lectin (90), CaMV (108) and combined CaMV 35s promoter/NOS terminator (131) amplicons, and the upper marker (1500).

Mentions: Agilent Technologies state the Bioanalyzer 2100's advantages to be ease-of-use, speed of analysis, low sample volumes, and high reproducibility [9]. This instrument showed the least variability when repeatedly determining amplicon size, correctly identified the amplicons, and was able to quantify their concentration. This instrument exhibited some small bias in overestimating amplicon sizes compared to theoretical size. Figure 3 is an electropherogram and a “gel-like” view of a positive control sample; both clearly distinguish the amplicons.


Applicability of three alternative instruments for food authenticity analysis: GMO identification.

Burrell A, Foy C, Burns M - Biotechnol Res Int (2011)

Electropherogram and “gel-like” image of positive control on the Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100. The x-axis on the electropherogram represents amplicon size (bp), whist the y-axis represents the measurement response of fluorescence units (FUs). Amplicons of interest in order of size (bp) are lower marker (15), Zein (80), Lectin (90), CaMV (108) and combined CaMV 35s promoter/NOS terminator (131) amplicons, and the upper marker (1500).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3065168&req=5

fig3: Electropherogram and “gel-like” image of positive control on the Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100. The x-axis on the electropherogram represents amplicon size (bp), whist the y-axis represents the measurement response of fluorescence units (FUs). Amplicons of interest in order of size (bp) are lower marker (15), Zein (80), Lectin (90), CaMV (108) and combined CaMV 35s promoter/NOS terminator (131) amplicons, and the upper marker (1500).
Mentions: Agilent Technologies state the Bioanalyzer 2100's advantages to be ease-of-use, speed of analysis, low sample volumes, and high reproducibility [9]. This instrument showed the least variability when repeatedly determining amplicon size, correctly identified the amplicons, and was able to quantify their concentration. This instrument exhibited some small bias in overestimating amplicon sizes compared to theoretical size. Figure 3 is an electropherogram and a “gel-like” view of a positive control sample; both clearly distinguish the amplicons.

Bottom Line: Ensuring foods are correctly labelled for ingredients derived from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is an issue facing manufacturers, retailers, and enforcement agencies.This study examines the fitness for purpose of the application of three laboratory electrophoresis instruments (Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100, Lab901 TapeStation, and Shimadzu MCE-202 MultiNA) for the detection of GMOs using PCR based on a previously validated protocol.Whilst minor differences in the performance characteristics of bias and precision were observed, all three instruments demonstrated their applicability in using this protocol for screening of GMO ingredients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Molecular and Cell Biology, LGC, Queens Road, Teddington, Middlesex TW11 0LY, UK.

ABSTRACT
Ensuring foods are correctly labelled for ingredients derived from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is an issue facing manufacturers, retailers, and enforcement agencies. DNA approaches for the determination of food authenticitys often use the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and PCR products can be detected using capillary or gel electrophoresis. This study examines the fitness for purpose of the application of three laboratory electrophoresis instruments (Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100, Lab901 TapeStation, and Shimadzu MCE-202 MultiNA) for the detection of GMOs using PCR based on a previously validated protocol. Whilst minor differences in the performance characteristics of bias and precision were observed, all three instruments demonstrated their applicability in using this protocol for screening of GMO ingredients.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus