Advertisement

Cytotechnology

, Volume 65, Issue 5, pp 811–818 | Cite as

Transgene copy number comparison in recombinant mammalian cell lines: critical reflection of quantitative real-time PCR evaluation

  • Wolfgang Sommeregger
  • Bernhard Prewein
  • David Reinhart
  • Alexander Mader
  • Renate KunertEmail author
Brief Report

Abstract

Nucleic acid quantification is a relevant issue for the characterization of mammalian recombinant cell lines and also for the registration of producer clones. Quantitative real-time PCR is a powerful tool to investigate nucleic acid levels but numerous different quantification strategies exist, which sometimes lead to misinterpretation of obtained qPCR data. In contrast to absolute quantification using amplicon- or plasmid standard curves, relative quantification strategies relate the gene of interest to an endogenous reference gene. The relative quantification methods also consider the amplification efficiency for the calculation of the gene copy number and thus more accurate results compared to absolute quantification methods are generated. In this study two recombinant Chinese hamster ovary cell lines were analysed for their transgene copy number using different relative quantification strategies. The individual calculation methods resulted in differences of relative gene copy numbers because efficiency calculations have strong impact on gene copy numbers. However, in context of comparing transgene copy numbers of two individual clones the influence of the calculation method is marginal. Therefore especially for the comparison of two cell lines with the identical transgene any of the relative qPCR methods was proven as powerful tool.

Keywords

CHO Cellline development Gene copy number qPCR LinReg 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Part of this study was partly funded by Polymun Scientific Immunbiologische Forschung GmbH, Donaustraße 99, 3400 Klosterneuburg, Austria.

Conflict of interest

None

References

  1. Bahr SM, Borgschulte T, Kayser KJ, Lin N (2009) Using microarray technology to select housekeeping genes in Chinese hamster ovary cells. Biotechnol Bioeng 104:1041–1046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bustin SA (2009) A-Z of quantitative PCR. International University Line, La Jolla, CAGoogle Scholar
  3. Bustin SA, Benes V, Garson JA, Hellemans J, Huggett J, Kubista M, Mueller R, Nolan T, Pfaffl MW, Shipley GL, Vandesompele J, Wittwer CT (2009) The MIQE guidelines: minimum information for publication of quantitative real-time PCR experiments. Clin Chem 55:611–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ginzinger DG (2002) Gene quantification using real-time quantitative PCR: an emerging technology hits the mainstream. Exp Hematol 30:503–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Heid CA, Stevens J, Livak KJ, Williams PM (1996) Real time quantitative PCR. Genome Res 6:986–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kibbe WA (2007) OligoCalc: an online oligonucleotide properties calculator. Nucleic Acids Res 35:W43–W46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kim JY, Kim YG, Lee GM (2012) CHO cells in biotechnology for production of recombinant proteins: current state and further potential. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 93:917–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD (2001) Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-Delta Delta C(T)) Method. Methods 25:402–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mader A, Prewein B, Zboray K, Casanova E, Kunert R (2013) Exploration of BAC versus plasmid expression vectors in recombinant CHO cells. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 97(9):4049–4054Google Scholar
  10. Pfaffl MW (2001) A new mathematical model for relative quantification in real-time RT-PCR. Nucleic Acids Res 29:e45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rozen S, Skaletsky H (2000) Primer3 on the WWW for general users and for biologist programmers. Methods Mol Biol 132:365–386Google Scholar
  12. Ruijter JM, Ramakers C, Hoogaars WM, Karlen Y, Bakker O, van den Hoff MJ, Moorman AF (2009) Amplification efficiency: linking baseline and bias in the analysis of quantitative PCR data. Nucleic Acids Res 37:e45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Tuomi JM, Voorbraak F, Jones DL, Ruijter JM (2010) Bias in the Cq value observed with hydrolysis probe based quantitative PCR can be corrected with the estimated PCR efficiency value. Methods 50:313–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Walsh G (2005) Biopharmaceuticals: recent approvals and likely directions. Trends Biotechnol 23:553–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wilhelm J, Hahn M, Pingoud A (2000) Influence of DNA target melting behavior on real-time PCR quantification. Clin Chem 46:1738–1743Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wolfgang Sommeregger
    • 1
  • Bernhard Prewein
    • 1
  • David Reinhart
    • 1
  • Alexander Mader
    • 1
  • Renate Kunert
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Biotechnology, Vienna Institute of BioTechnology (BOKU–VIBT)University of Natural Resources and Life SciencesViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations