Search

Objective: Environmental DNA (eDNA) detection is a transformative tool for ecological surveys which in many cases offers greater accuracy and cost-effectiveness for tracking low-density, cryptic species compared to conventional methods. For the use of targeted quantitative PCR (qPCR)-based eDNA detection, protocols typically require freshly prepared reagents for each sample, necessitating systematic evaluation of reagent stability within the functional context of eDNA standard curve preparation and environmental sample evaluation. Herein, we assessed the effects of long-term storage and freeze–thaw cycles on qPCR reagents for eDNA analysis across six assays. Results: Results demonstrate qPCR plates (containing pre-made PCR mix, primer-probe, and DNA template) remain stable at 4 °C for three days before thermocycling without fidelity loss irrespective of qPCR assay used. Primer-probe mixes remain stable for five months of − 20 °C storage with monthly freeze-thaw cycles also irrespective of qPCR assay used. Synthetic DNA stocks maintain consistency in standard curves and sensitivity for three months under the same conditions. These findings enhance our comprehension of qPCR reagent stability, facilitating streamlined eDNA workflows by minimizing repetitive reagent preparations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most information concerning possible cancer risks attributable to lifetime exposure to diagnostic x-rays comes from studies in which x-ray history was ascertained by interview or questionnaire, but little is known about the accuracy of such information. The authors assessed agreement between medical x-ray histories obtained through interview and by review of medical records from thyroid cancer case-control studies conducted in Sweden (1985-1992; 123 cases and 123 controls) and from members of a prepaid health plan in the United States (1986-1991; 50 cases and 50 controls). In both studies, substantial disagreement was found between the numbers of x-ray examinations reported in the interview and in the medical records. There was an indication of relatively poorer reporting among controls, particularly for certain types of x-ray examinations and for large numbers of such examinations. Estimates of the risk associated with exposure to diagnostic x-rays were similar, regardless of whether interview or medical record data were used, even though ordinal dose classifications based on the two sources differed considerably. In populations with a high frequency of exposure, spurious associations with numbers of x-ray examinations or estimated thyroid dose might arise because of differences in recall. However, in the present data, reporting errors by cases and controls seemed to be largely nondifferential.