Comparison of three PCR-based assays for SNP genotyping in plants

BackgroundPCR allelic discrimination technologies have broad applications in the detection of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genetics and genomics. The use of fluorescence-tagged probes is the leading method for targeted SNP detection, but assay costs and error rates could be improved to increase genotyping efficiency. A new assay, rhAmp, based on RNase H2-dependent PCR (rhPCR) combined with a universal reporter system attempts to reduce error rates from primer/primer and primer/probe dimers while lowering costs compared to existing technologies. Before rhAmp can be widely adopted, more experimentation is required to validate its effectiveness versus established methods.ResultsThe aim of this study was to compare the accuracy, sensitivity and costs of TaqMan, KASP, and rhAmp SNP genotyping methods in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). For each approach, assays were designed to genotype 33 SNPs in a set of 96 sugar beet individuals obtained from 12 parental lines. The assay sensitivity was tested using a series of dilutions from 100 to 0.1 ng per PCR reaction. PCR was carried out on the QuantStudio 12K Flex Real-Time PCR System (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA). The call-rate, defined as the percentage of genotype calls relative to the possible number of calls, was 97.0, 97.6, and 98.1% for TaqMan, KASP, and rhAmp, respectively. For rhAmp SNP, 24 of the 33 SNPs demonstrated 100% concordance with other two technologies. The genotype concordance with either technologies for the other 9 targets was above 99% (99.34–99.89%).ConclusionThe sensitivity test demonstrated that TaqMan and rhAmp were able to successfully determine SNP genotypes using as little as 0.2 ng DNA per reaction, while the KASP was unable to ascertain SNP states below 0.9 ng of DNA per reaction. Comparative cost per reaction was also analyzed with rhAmp SNP offering the lowest cost per reaction. In conclusion, rhAmp produced more calls than either TaqMan or KASP, higher signal to NTC data while offering the lowest cost per reaction.

[1]  N Risch,et al.  High-throughput genotyping with single nucleotide polymorphisms. , 2001, Genome research.

[2]  M. Behlke,et al.  RNase H-dependent PCR (rhPCR): improved specificity and single nucleotide polymorphism detection using blocked cleavable primers , 2011, BMC biotechnology.

[3]  Acga Cheng,et al.  Molecular Marker Technology for Genetic Improvement of Underutilised Crops , 2017 .

[4]  L. Panella,et al.  Identification and Validation of a SNP Marker Linked to the Gene HsBvm-1 for Nematode Resistance in Sugar Beet , 2015, Plant Molecular Biology Reporter.

[5]  Jiazheng Yuan,et al.  Introduction of High Throughput and Cost Effective SNP Geno - typing Platforms in Soybean , 2014 .

[6]  F. Fagioli,et al.  Development of a Low-Cost Stem-Loop Real-Time Quantification PCR Technique for EBV miRNA Expression Analysis , 2016, Molecular Biotechnology.

[7]  Michael J. Thomson,et al.  High-Throughput SNP Genotyping to Accelerate Crop Improvement , 2014 .

[8]  S. Martino‐Catt,et al.  Editor's Choice Series: The Next Generation of Biotech Crops , 2008, Plant Physiology.

[9]  High-Throughput RAD-SNP Genotyping for Characterization of Sugar Beet Genotypes , 2013, Plant Molecular Biology Reporter.

[10]  S. Hearne,et al.  Single nucleotide polymorphism genotyping using Kompetitive Allele Specific PCR (KASP): overview of the technology and its application in crop improvement , 2013, Molecular Breeding.

[11]  Chunlin He,et al.  SNP genotyping: the KASP assay. , 2014, Methods in molecular biology.

[12]  M. Rhodes,et al.  Assessment of two flexible and compatible SNP genotyping platforms: TaqMan SNP Genotyping Assays and the SNPlex Genotyping System. , 2005, Mutation research.

[13]  P. Langridge,et al.  Advantages of Amplifluor-like SNP markers over KASP in plant genotyping , 2017, BMC Plant Biology.

[14]  Peter Kovacs,et al.  Targeted SNP genotyping using the TaqMan® assay. , 2011, Methods in molecular biology.

[15]  Rita H. Mumm,et al.  Molecular Plant Breeding as the Foundation for 21st Century Crop Improvement1 , 2008, Plant Physiology.

[16]  Jiazheng Yuan,et al.  Introduction of High Throughput and Cost Effective SNP Genotyping Platforms in Soybean , 2014 .

[17]  Christian Schlötterer,et al.  The evolution of molecular markers — just a matter of fashion? , 2004, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[18]  R. Gouider,et al.  Using KASP technique to screen LRRK2 G2019S mutation in a large Tunisian cohort , 2017, BMC Medical Genetics.