ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2006
Some guidelines for the analysis of genomic DNA by PCR-LC-ESI-MS.
Article in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oligonucleotide therapeutics in sports? An antidoping perspective.Archiv der Pharmazie · 2025Review
- Improved Polymerase Chain Reaction-restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism Genotyping of Toxic Pufferfish by Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2016Article
- Relative quantitation of transfer RNAs using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry and signature digestion products.Nucleic acids research · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ion-pair reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography online hyphenated to electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (ICEMS) represents an efficient method for the characterization of nucleic acids amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Since sample preparation is limited to PCR, the optimization of its solution conditions is of utmost importance for efficient mass spectrometric detection. The compatibility of a number of different commercially available PCR components including DNA polymerases, deoxynucleotide triphosphates, bovine serum albumin, enhancer, and ionic buffers was evaluated. These experiments revealed that higher concentration of enhancer and detergents such as Tween-20 or Nonidet P-40 impairs the mass spectrometric detection of nucleic acids and should be avoided within the PCR mixture. The optimized analytical platform was applied to the characterization of PCR products covering parts of the first hypervariable region of the noncoding mitochondrial control region. Truncated amplicons were detected attributable to the use of low quality primers. Furthermore, due to the proofreading activity of the applied polymerase system, mismatches between the primer and the target sequence located at the last or the second last base at the 3'-end of primers were corrected and detected within the corresponding amplicons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.