4.7 Review

Basic principles for developing real-time PCR methods used in food analysis: A review

Journal

TRENDS IN FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 91, Issue -, Pages 574-585

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE LONDON
DOI: 10.1016/j.tifs.2019.07.037

Keywords

Real-time PCR; Food analysis; Species identification; Method acceptance parameters; PCR inhibition; PCR amplification control

Funding

  1. South Korea Government [2017ES0017]
  2. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, South Korea [16161MFDS057]
  3. Sangji University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The increased interest in global food fraud has led to the development of a number of advanced methods, among which real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) currently plays an integral role in food authentication. However, the lack of standard parameters for the development and validation of real-time PCR methods hampers their utilization across different laboratories and conditions, leading to inconsistent results. Scope and approach: This review summarizes and assesses different methods presented throughout a large number of scientific papers, including DNA extraction, primer design, and quantification (or qualification) as well as parameters for the development and validation of real-time PCR methods in food analysis. Key Findings and Conclusions: Inhibitors in DNA extracts can cause decreased PCR sensitivity and false negative results; thus, the use of PCR inhibition and amplification controls (e.g., the 18S ribosomal RNA gene) is essential for obtaining accurate real-time PCR results. In quantitative real-time PCR methods, the results obtained using species-specific systems need to be normalized by using reference systems for the improvement of their accuracy. Therefore, this review will provide researchers with a beneficial guide for the development of real-time PCR methods in a harmonious manner and contribute to an enhanced applicability of the methods developed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available