Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28085908›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Quantification of Plasmid Copy Number with Single Colour Droplet Digital PCR.

Magdalena Plotka, Mateusz Wozniak, Tadeusz Kaczorowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Universal rules govern plasmid copy number.Nature communications · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Identification and quantification of viableFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. A plasmid system with tunable copy number.Nature communications · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Reconsidering plasmid maintenance factors for computational plasmid design.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2019
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Magdalena PlotkaLaboratory of Extremophiles Biology, Department of Microbiology, University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland.
Mateusz WozniakLaboratory of Extremophiles Biology, Department of Microbiology, University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland.
Tadeusz KaczorowskiLaboratory of Extremophiles Biology, Department of Microbiology, University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacteria can be considered as biological nanofactories that manufacture a cornucopia of bioproducts most notably recombinant proteins. As such, they must perfectly match with appropriate plasmid vectors to ensure successful overexpression of target genes. Among many parameters that correlate positively with protein productivity plasmid copy number plays pivotal role. Therefore, development of new and more accurate methods to assess this critical parameter will result in optimization of expression of plasmid-encoded genes. In this study, we present a simple and highly accurate method for quantifying plasmid copy number utilizing an EvaGreen single colour, droplet digital PCR. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this method by examining the copy number of the pBR322 vector within Escherichia coli DH5α cells. The obtained results were successfully validated by real-time PCR. However, we observed a strong dependency of the plasmid copy number on the method chosen for isolation of the total DNA. We found that application of silica-membrane-based columns for DNA purification or DNA isolation with use of bead-beating, a mechanical cell disruption lead to determination of an average of 20.5 or 7.3 plasmid copies per chromosome, respectively. We found that recovery of the chromosomal DNA from purification columns was less efficient than plasmid DNA (46.5 ± 1.9% and 87.4 ± 5.5%, respectively) which may lead to observed differences in plasmid copy number. Besides, the plasmid copy number variations dependent on DNA template isolation method, we found that droplet digital PCR is a very convenient method for measuring bacterial plasmid content. Careful determination of plasmid copy number is essential for better understanding and optimization of recombinant proteins production process. Droplet digital PCR is a very precise method that allows performing thousands of individual PCR reactions in a single tube. The ddPCR does not depend on running standard curves and is a straightforward and reliable method to quantify the plasmid copy number. Therefore we believe that the ddPCR designed in this study will be widely used for any plasmid copy number calculation in the future.

Indexed as

DNA, BacterialDNA Copy Number VariationsEscherichia coliPlasmidsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID28085908
PMCPMC5234771

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.