PCR Not Allowed

Duke Groebe drg at prophet.pharm.pitt.edu
Thu Aug 15 08:24:32 EST 1996


In article <Pine.PMDF.3.91.960814221932.543297829B-100000 at kids.wustl.edu>,
haviland at KIDS.WUSTL.EDU ("David L. Haviland, Ph.D.") wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 14 Aug 1996 WSchick at aol.com wrote:
> 
> > What should we call it?
> > 
> > PCR is a trademark for the patented PCR process using TAQ.
> > 
> > So what do you call amplification by Pfu  or Vent or Brk or?
> > 

-SNIP-

> Walt:
> 
> VERY interesting.  How about calling it "TCA" for ThermoCycling 
> Amplification?  One could then state the enzyme of choice (Vent,KlenTaq, 
> insert_your_favorite...).  
> 
> A methods section might read something like, "The 400 bp probe for the
> immunoglobulin heavy chain was prepared using TCA and Vent using standard
> protocols (use_your_favorite_reference)."  There's no question what is
> going on and you're steering clear of exact working that would step on
> PE's toes. 
> 
> Yours,
> David



Why not simply state that the DNA was amplified in vitro?  You need some
kind of polymerase for the amplification, so referring to the type of
polymerase is redundundant (unless you protocol absolutely requires a
particular type of polymerase) and people will frequently use their
polymerase of choice anyway.  Thermocycling is also a given in any PCR.  

Your methods could then read "The 400 bp probe for the immunoglobulin heavy
chain was prepared by in vitro amplification (ref as appropriate)."


Thus, Science is spared yet one more acronym.

Duke



******************************************************************************
The opinions expressed here are my own.  MY very own and NOBODY else's!  I
THOUGHT OF THEM FIRST, HA HA, AND YOU DIDN'T!!  SEE!?  There's my name up
there!  And the date - Ooohh, the DATE!  That's important!  HEE HEE, I'M
GONNA BE RICH!  DO YOU HEAR ME!?  RICH!!  HA HA!!  They're mine...heh, heh,
all mine....  GOD!  I'm so smart!



More information about the Methods mailing list