title: Determination of the LOQ in real-time PCR by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis: application to qPCR assays for Fusarium verticillioides and F. proliferatum.
abstract: Real-time PCR (qPCR) is the principal technique for the quantification of pathogen biomass in host tissue, yet no generic methods exist for the determination of the limit of quantification (LOQ) and the limit of detection (LOD) in qPCR. We suggest using the Youden index in the context of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for this purpose. The LOQ was defined as the amount of target DNA that maximizes the sum of sensitivity and specificity. The LOD was defined as the lowest amount of target DNA that was amplified with a false-negative rate below a given threshold. We applied this concept to qPCR assays for Fusarium verticillioides and Fusarium proliferatum DNA in maize kernels. Spiked matrix and field samples characterized by melting curve analysis of PCR products were used as the source of true positives and true negatives. On the basis of the analysis of sensitivity and specificity of the assays, we estimated the LOQ values as 0.11 pg of DNA for spiked matrix and 0.62 pg of DNA for field samples for F. verticillioides. The LOQ values for F. proliferatum were 0.03 pg for spiked matrix and 0.24 pg for field samples. The mean LOQ values correspond to approximately eight genomes for F. verticillioides and three genomes for F. proliferatum. We demonstrated that the ROC analysis concept, developed for qualitative diagnostics, can be used for the determination of performance parameters of quantitative PCR.
authors: Molecular Phytopathology and Mycotoxin Research, Georg August University Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
authors: Sabine
authors: S
authors: Nutz
authors: Katharina
authors: K
authors: Döll
authors: Petr
authors: P
authors: Karlovsky
references: Mycopathologia. 1992 Feb;117(1-2):3-9
references: 1513372
references: J Agric Food Chem. 1999 Dec;47(12):5111-5
references: 10606581
references: Syst Appl Microbiol. 2006 Dec;29(8):681-9
references: 16513314
references: Mycologia. 2005 May-Jun;97(3):718-24
references: 16392259
references: Int J Mol Sci. 2008 Nov;9(11):2062-90
references: 19330061
references: J Food Prot. 1999 Jul;62(7):814-7
references: 10419280
references: Plant Dis. 1997 Feb;81(2):211-216
references: 30870899
references: Biom J. 2005 Aug;47(4):458-72
references: 16161804
references: Mycol Res. 2009 Oct;113(Pt 10):1137-45
references: 19631741
references: J Food Prot. 2004 Jun;67(6):1278-83
references: 15222565
references: Mycotoxin Res. 2008 Mar;24(1):40-52
references: 23606079
references: BMC Microbiol. 2006 Jan 23;6:4
references: 16430784
references: Food Addit Contam. 1995 Jul-Aug;12(4):599-607
references: 7589723
references: Mycotoxin Res. 2009 Mar;25(1):29-39
references: 23604934
references: Int J Mol Sci. 2008 Nov;9(11):2306-21
references: 19330077
references: Plant Dis. 1998 Jan;82(1):22-25
references: 30857062
references: Int J Food Microbiol. 2007 May 30;116(3):350-7
references: 17412440
references: Mycopathologia. 1996 Jul;135(1):29-34
references: 20882450
references: Mycopathologia. 1997;139(1):35-41
references: 9511235
references: Appl Environ Microbiol. 1996 Nov;62(11):4039-43
references: 8899996
references: Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2008 Jan;48(1):21-49
references: 18274964
references: Phytopathology. 2008 Mar;98(3):359-68
references: 18944088
references: Appl Environ Microbiol. 1994 May;60(5):1695-7
references: 8017951
references: Stat Med. 1989 Nov;8(11):1381-91
references: 2692111
references: Prev Vet Med. 2000 May 30;45(1-2):23-41
references: 10802332