Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Research Notes and BioMed Central.

Open Access Highly Accessed Open Badges Short Report

False negative results from using common PCR reagents

Dean J Bacich, Kathryn M Sobek, Jessica L Cummings, Allison A Atwood and Denise S O'Keefe*

BMC Research Notes 2011, 4:457  doi:10.1186/1756-0500-4-457

PubMed Commons is an experimental system of commenting on PubMed abstracts, introduced in October 2013. Comments are displayed on the abstract page, but during the initial closed pilot, only registered users can read or post comments. Any researcher who is listed as an author of an article indexed by PubMed is entitled to participate in the pilot. If you would like to participate and need an invitation, please email, giving the PubMed ID of an article on which you are an author. For more information, see the PubMed Commons FAQ.

XMRV detection

Mark James Robinson   (2011-11-29 15:03)  Jefferiss Trust Laboratories, Imperial College London email

Dear Sir,

You state in your discussion that "Of the remaining 27 publications, 13 studies used Taq or master-mixes likely containing UNG (it was present in 8 studies [2-9] and possibly used in the remaining 5 studies [10-14] that we examined"

As authors of study [11], we would like to clarify that we did not use UNG in our master mix as indicated in the methods section of our publication. We were able to show that our PCR was highly sensitive.

Furthermore, we have been able to detect traces of contaminating murine DNA by nested PCR in several publications (see references below), indicating that PCR inhibition is not an issue in our assay.

Robinson et al. Retrovirology 2010, 7:108
Erlwein et al. PLoS One 2011, 6(8):e23484

Competing interests

We are the authors of reference [11].


Post a comment