Back to PCR

Setting Up the PCR Laboratory Space Correctly

Contaminant DNA usually finds its way into PCR assays through:
 Working environment (e.g., rooms and equipment, lab benches and other work surfaces).
 Consumable reagents and supplies (e.g., oligonucleotides, media for sample collection
and transport, plasticware).
 Laboratory staff and their work habits (e.g., contaminants from skin, hair, gloves,
production of aerosols during pipetting).

Therefore, preventing microbial cross-contamination has two equally important components:

setting up laboratory space correctly (discussed below) and cultivating laboratory habits that
prevent cross-contamination. Once the lab is correctly configured and good laboratory habits are
followed by all personnel, preventing contamination become almost automatic and the laboratory
can focus on producing meaningful results.

Usually, cross-contamination and environmental contamination occur during sample

manipulations. So, from the very beginning, the PCR laboratory should be set up to accomplish
two goals:
 Physically separating the lab areas used for sample preparation, DNA extraction,
amplification and post-PCR analysis, and
 Minimizing the number of sample manipulations.

Physical Separation of Work Areas

Even if all steps are performed manually, a properly set-up PCR lab will contain physically
separate areas for sample preparation, DNA extraction, amplification and post-PCR analysis.
Ideally, each of these takes place in a separate room and each of these rooms has:
 A dedicated set of reagents, pipettes, and disposables that are kept and used exclusively in
that room.

For analysis of microbiological samples, we recommend storing bags that contain disposables
(tubes, tips, reagent tubs) in a separate, suitable room. (Presence of UV light fixtures in this
storage room is recommended.)

 A full set of equipment, such as refrigerator, centrifuges and safety cabinets.

 A dedicated set of lab coats that are kept and used exclusively in that room.
  A safety cabinet, if samples are potentially hazardous or infectious.

Organization of a PCR laboratory with separate pre- and post-PCR rooms.

Minimizing Sample Manipulation

The best way to minimize sample manipulation (and the corresponding risk of contamination) is
to automate as many steps in PCR analysis as possible.

Cultivating Laboratory Habits That Prevent Cross-Contamination

By itself, a properly set-up PCR laboratory space will not prevent cross-contamination. Once
people start working in that space, their actions introduce significant risks of contaminating the
PCR samples.

Therefore, preventing cross-contamination requires the cooperation of all laboratory personnel.

Only if all the people in the laboratory follow good work habits, will the laboratory be free of
contamination.

This may seem unduly harsh. We all know laboratory personalities that seem to lead a charmed
life, working with total disregard of good laboratory practices yet seeming to always get good
results. However, once those persons join a laboratory group, their actions have the potential to
ruin the results of all their co-workers. That means even if you are tempted to take short cuts in a
PCR procedure, or to ignore the precautions outlined below, don't do it!

Example: Never reverse the direction of the workflow (e.g., by transporting amplified material
into the DNA extraction room). The steps in the PCR workflow are always unidirectional, from
DNA extraction to amplification. This principle holds for working procedures as well as for
reagents and consumables.

Regulatory Agencies and Conclusions

A Technical Guide to PCR Technologies
Table of Contents
 Introduction and Historical Timelines
 Polymerase Chain Reaction
 Quantitative PCR
 Digital PCR
 Quantitative PCR and Digital PCR Detection Methods
 PCR/qPCR/dPCR Assay Design
 Sample Purification and Quality Assessment
 Reverse Transcription
 Assay Optimization and Validation
 Data Analysis
 Troubleshooting
 Regulatory Agencies and Conclusions
 Additional Resources
 Protocols

Regulatory Landscape Overview

While many PCR assays are developed for research applications there are further considerations
for those that are being developed to become diagnostic assays or to be performed in support of:
Biologics License Application (BLA), New Drug Application (NDA), Premarket Approval
(PMA), 510(K) or other regulatory filing. These will need to be validated and performed in
accordance with the regulated environment. The regulated environment requires quality
assurance group oversight and that work is carried out in compliance with quality systems under
the appropriate regulations. This is dependent on the purpose for which the PCR-based assay is
used.

There are multiple regulations that are governed by several international and country-specific
agencies, covering different products and industries. For example, qPCR based assays are the
most sensitive for detection of residual DNA that is considered to be an impurity and remains
after manufacturing of biopharmaceuticals or vaccines that are produced using live systems such
as microbial or mammalian cell cultures. The requirements for assay sensitivity can vary from
product to product due to differences in the dose and the size of the host genome. However,
varying amounts of residual DNA may be suggested as acceptable by different regulatory
agencies, e.g., less than 100 pg/dose by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)1 but less than
10 ng/dose by the World Health Organization (WHO)2 and European Agency for the Evaluation
of Medicinal Products (EMEA)3. At the same time, regulations are changing with the progress of
the industry, analysis of more data and efforts for harmonization. Examples of the key agencies
are presented in Table 12.1.

Table 12.1. Examples of Key Regulatory Agencies.

Regulatory Agency Governing Governing Authority

Territory
Responsible for providing leadership
on global health matters, shaping
the health research agenda, setting
World Health Organization United Nationsnorms and standards, articulating
(WHO) system evidence-based policy options,
providing technical support to
countries and monitoring and
assessing health trends.
Recommending ways to achieve
International Conference for
greater harmonization in the
Harmonization of Technical
USA, EU and interpretation and application
Requirements for Registration
Japan of technical guidelines and
of Pharmaceuticals for
requirements for pharmaceutical
Human Use (ICH)
product global registration.
World
International Organization for Governing almost all aspects of
(currently 164
Standardization (ISO technology and manufacturing.
countries)
Food and Drug USA Responsible for regulation and
Administration (FDA) supervision of safety of food, drugs,
medical devices, cosmetics and
 veterinary products.
Environmental Protection Regulating protection of human
USA
Agency (EPA) health and the environment.
The European Agency for
Evaluation of medicines for human
the Evaluation of Medicinal EU
use
Products (EMA)
Australia Therapeutic Goods Regulatory authority for therapeutic
Australia
Administration (TGA) goods.
Responsible for regulating all
Medicines and Healthcare
medicines and medical devices in the
Products Regulatory Agency UK
UK by ensuring they work and are
(MHRA)
acceptably safe.
Regulating maximum residue limits
for agricultural chemicals in foods,
Ministry of Health, Labor, and
Japan basic food and drug regulations,
Welfare (MHLW)
standards for foods, food additives,
etc.

Examples of the most common regulations that are governing PCR based assays include Good
Laboratory Practice (GLP), Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP), or Clinical Laboratory
Improvement Amendments (CLIA) regulations.

GLP regulations are often mistaken for general good laboratory practices, for example those
addressing the use of protective clothing such as gloves and lab coats or the use of standard
operating procedures. In reality, GLP is a set of regulations addressing performance of “the non-
clinical safety testing of test items contained in pharmaceutical products, pesticide products,
cosmetic products, veterinary drugs as well as food additives, feed additives, and industrial
chemicals”4. GLP regulations direct how these laboratory studies are planned, performed,
monitored, recorded, reported and archived.

World Health Organization defines GMP as the aspect of quality assurance that ensures that
medicinal products are consistently produced and controlled to the quality standards appropriate
to their intended use and as required by the product specification. GMP defines quality measures
for both production and quality control and defines general measures to ensure that processes
necessary for production and testing are clearly defined, validated, reviewed and documented,
and that the personnel, premises and materials are suitable for the production of pharmaceuticals
and biological products, including vaccines. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) refer to
cGMP as “systems that assure proper design, monitoring and control of manufacturing processes
and facilities. This includes establishing strong quality management systems, obtaining
appropriate quality raw materials, establishing robust operating procedures, detecting and
investigating product quality deviations and maintaining reliable testing laboratories”5.

As defined by CDC, the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA)

regulations include federal standards applicable to all U.S. facilities or sites that test human
specimens for health assessment or to diagnose, prevent, or treat disease. CDC, in partnership
with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and FDA, supports the CLIA program
and clinical laboratory quality. The CMS regulates all laboratory testing (except research). The
objective of the CLIA program is to ensure high quality laboratory testing.

Rapid technology development coincides with quick changes in instrumentation and analysis
software. That creates an additional opportunity and pressure for pursuing the newest
developments. Researchers supporting different phases in the drug or development process
(discovery versus manufacturing, for example) will have different needs and sets of requirements
for reagents, instruments and software based on the regulatory environment that also will need to
be considered during experimental design. While researchers doing discovery in a non-regulated
environment can work with “research use only” reagents, equipment and software and adopt new
advances in technology, translational scientists working with assays supporting clinical trials are
required to work within regulatory constraints. This difference is also apparent in the case of
diagnostic assay development and the significant burden of validation requirements can be a
limiting factor in the choice of platforms and reagents.

Assay Validation
In addition to the evaluation of the assays, as discussed in PCR/qPCR/dPCR Assay Design,
assays that are used in regulated environments must be taken through analytical validation and
documentation in accordance with ICH guidelines that are recommended for adoption by the
regulatory bodies of the European Union, Japan and USA6 for registration of pharmaceuticals for
human use. Diagnostic assays need to be validated in compliance with CLIA/College of
American Pathologists (CAP) requirements. Generally, these regulations have similar
requirements for assay validation but also each has specific differences that need to be
considered during assay validation protocol design.

ICH guidelines Q2(R1)6 address typical validation characteristics which should be considered
and they have been applied to bioanalytical method validations, including PCR-based methods,
in EMEA guidelines issued in 20117. The guideline focuses on the validation of the bioanalytical
methods generating quantitative concentration data used for pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic
parameter determinations. Guidance and criteria are given on the application of these validated
methods in the routine analysis of samples from animal and human studies.

The main characteristics of a bioanalytical method that are essential to ensure the acceptability of
the performance and the reliability of analytical results are: Selectivity (specificity), lower limit
of quantification, the response function and calibration range (calibration curve performance—
linearity and range), accuracy, precision, matrix effects, stability of the analyte(s) in the
biological matrix and stability of the analyte(s) and of the internal standard in the stock and
working solutions and in extracts under the entire period of storage and processing conditions.

The guidelines address criteria for acceptance during validation and analytical runs, as well as
key components for reports. CLIA and CAP requirements for diagnostic assay validation have
slight differences. CAP requires parameters 1–6 to be evaluated for both FDA cleared and
Laboratory Developed Tests (LDT) assays, while CLIA allows for FDA cleared tests to be
evaluated according to parameters 1–4 only. At the same time, CLIA has an additional “other”
category that is defined as “any other performance characteristic required for test performance”.

Regulatory Parameters

1. Reportable Range

2. Precision

3. Accuracy

4. Reference Range

5. Analytical Sensitivity

6. Analytical Specificity

7. Other

There is often confusion regarding terminology, particularly pertaining to assay validation versus
qualification.

Prior to validation, each assay should undergo a set of assay optimization experiments that will
establish assay performance. These data will be used for establishing the assay validation
protocol. Well-conducted optimization experiments will greatly reduce the chance of assay
failure during validation.

Assay Validation: Full set of evaluation experiments (for the parameters listed above) performed
in accordance with a validation protocol to demonstrate and document performance of an assay
and set specifications and criteria of acceptance for expected assay performance during testing.

Assay Qualification: Assay qualification is a reduced set of evaluation experiments that mostly
focus on demonstrating that an established assay will produce expected results for the intended
role (for example, specific type of samples or conditions).

Approved Tests
PCR-based techniques are considered by industry and regulatory agencies as one of the “gold
standard” technologies that are used for validation of results obtained by different assays and
technologies when applicable, during 510(k) and PMA applications. For example, for validation
of array-based genotyping assays or platforms, polymorphism, genotype call validation can be
performed by PCR amplification of the target region followed by sequencing and/or by detection
with qPCR probe or primer-specific assays. There are multiple regulatory guidelines that address
specific assay types.
The majority of PCR-based tests that are being approved for diagnostics are focusing on
detection of viral agents and mutations associated with genes involved in cancer pathways.

During the initial nine months of 2013, four out of 22 FDA approved medical devices and tests
were PCR-based assays (18%), all of them were supporting personalized medicine and three out
of four were companion diagnostic tests (Table 12.2)8-11. By identifying patients who have
particular mutations, such as EGFR exon 19 deletion or exon 21 (L858R) substitution in non-
small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) cells, the test results are used to stratify the subpopulation of
patients who will have a higher chance of responding to GILOTRIF®, a drug that is directed
towards blocking abnormal function of the mutant EGFR protein.

Laboratory tests that are applied to identifying which particular strain of Hepatitis C virus (HCV)
the patient is infected with9 are an important factor in ensuring better treatment outcomes for
patients with chronic HCV infections.

Evaluated together with other clinical data tests support a personalized choice of appropriate
therapy since different HCV genotypes respond differently to available drugs.

Table 12.2. PCR-based Medical Devices Cleared or Approved by FDA in 2013.

Device Name Companion Diagnostic Date

therascreen® EGFR RGQ PCR Kit– Yes, GILOTRIF® (afatinib) is a drug
7/12/2013
P120022 used to treat patients with NSCLC
Abbott RealTime HCV Genotype II;
No, laboratory test that can
Abbott RealTime HCV Genotype II
determine certain genetic types 6/20/2013
Control Kit; and Uracil-N-Glycosylase
of the hepatitis C virus (HCV)
(UNG)–P120012
Yes, Mekinist® (tramatenib) and
THxID®–BRAF Kit for use on the
Tafinlar® (dabrafenib) are drugs
ABI 7500 Fast Dx Real-Time PCR 5/29/2013
used to treat patients with
Instrument–P120014
advanced (metastatic) melanoma
Yes, TARCEVA® (erlotinib) is a drug
cobas® EGFR Mutation Test–P120019 5/14/2013
used to treat patients with NSCLC

Despite fast technological advances, regulatory approval process for new assays may take
several years and currently PCR-based applications are taking a more prominent role in assays
that are passing the approval process and replacing classical methods, such as culture, not only in
the diagnostic arena but also for release testing of biologics.

The MycoTOOL® PCR Mycoplasma Detection Kit-based test was approved by FDA on
November 1st, 2012. It is the first commercially available Mycoplasma PCR test approved by
FDA that can replace conventional and time-consuming mycoplasma detection assays (culture
methods as well as indicator cell culture method) for the testing of biologics and
biopharmaceuticals12. This test can be performed in a few hours and replaces up to 28 days
processing, thus significantly improving time for lot release of biopharmaceuticals and vaccines.

Conclusions
Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) based methods are powerful techniques that can provide
scientifically sound data, even within the budget constraints that researchers are currently
experiencing. This manual provides an introduction to PCR, qPCR, RT-PCR and digital PCR
with an overview of technical options and related applications, alongside guidance for
troubleshooting PCR-based data. This handbook has been designed to support scientists who
have different degrees of familiarity with PCR-based methods and serve as an introduction to the
technology, a reference guide and a tool for daily use for researchers in academic, as well as
industrial and diagnostic laboratories.

Different PCR-based methods are used by the scientific community and the choice of technique
adopted is based on
application, which range from a classical end-point PCR when a fast and simple “yes” or “no”
answer is needed, to digital PCR to detect rare mutations. As summarized in Introduction and
Historical Timelines, PCRbased technology is mature and well established; significant
knowledge has been accumulated over the last four decades and thousands of scientific papers
are being published every month that use PCR-based techniques. That number has continued to
grow linearly over the last 20 years, as can be seen in Figure 12.1.

Figure 12.1. The number of records published per year (1971–2012) resulting from a search of
NCBI PubMed database13 when the key word “PCR” was used.

As with every technology, PCR-based methods have limitations. This manual provides
information, strategies, comparisons of different detection systems and analysis methods (see
Data Analysis) to assist researchers in the appropriate evaluation of these limitations and to
design an optimal experiment. As described in Quantitative PCR and Digital PCR Detection
Methods, there are different strengths for each qPCR detection chemistry method and these need
to be considered during the experimental design to balance sensitivity, specificity, cost of
reagents and resources and time available for assay optimization. The same consideration should
be applied when evaluating experimental design using individual vs. multiplex assays.

This manual also provides options for appropriate experimental design and workflow. All steps
in the process, from the quality of the sample to data analysis method, as well as a choice of
normalizing genes for determination of relative RNA expression, must be considered and
addressed during experimental design to reduce variability. A primary concern when working
with PCR is to control for cross contamination to avoid false positive results because these
techniques are highly sensitive.

There are different approaches to the laboratory set up that can assist in addressing that concern,
including use of proper laboratory practices with a focus on cleaning, physical segregation with
dedicated equipment and gowns and a unidirectional workflow. Proper cleaning must be
performed with nucleic acid destroying agents such as a simple 10% bleach solution and UV
irradiation (not to be replaced with common hospital disinfectants like Amphyl® that only have
antimicrobial properties). Segregation can be a simple separation into one place to store reagents
and set up the master mix for PCR reactions with addition of template and controls (“pre-PCR
area”) and a second place for re-amplification and data generation (“post-PCR area”). This
approach is commonly adopted in a research laboratory setting. At the opposite extreme,
separation would include a combination of dedicated, segregated differentially pressurized rooms
with separate air handling systems, dedicated personnel, equipment, gowns and a unidirectional
workflow. These separation methods are more often adopted in production and diagnostic
environments14. It can be challenging to ensure segregation in a small research laboratory where
space is limited and equipment cannot be dedicated. In this case, the focus must be on stringent
cleaning procedures before, after and between the steps, use of filtered pipet tips, bench top
workstations, and maximum possible physical separation. These measures can produce
successful results. However, additional controls need to be incorporated into experiments to
demonstrate lack of cross-contamination. An example workflow is presented in Figure 12.2.

Figure 12.2. Example of a Laboratory Workflow: Division of functional areas and the workflow
direction in the PCR assay process.
The importance of the quality of template and choice of appropriate QC assays is discussed
in Sample Purification and Quality Assessment and Reverse Transcription. Comparing RNA
samples that have undergone different degrees of degradation can lead to erroneous biological
conclusions about RNA expression signatures. Similarly, different samples may have different
concentrations of inhibitors that will impact RT or PCR efficiency and may produce false-
negative results or inaccurate ratios of expression. For example, there is a vast diversity of
sample types that are being interrogated with PCR-based techniques; multiple environmental
samples tested to evaluate biodiversity or to detect pathogens, different human and animal tissues
and bodily fluids to evaluate RNA expression signatures or DNA vaccines. Each of these can
have a plethora of unique inhibitors that may impact different assays in the same sample to a
variable degree.

Different biological questions can be answered by utilizing multiple workflows, reagents,

instruments and applications, as discussed throughout this guide. The choice of an optimal
technique, reagent, method of analysis, types and number of replicates and controls will be
dependent on multiple factors and constraints of individual projects as well as the researcher’s
experience and personal preferences. However, as discussed in Quantitative PCR and Digital
PCR, significant emphasis must be placed on maintaining compliance with MIQE guidelines15
through all phases of the experiment to assure scientific integrity of the data and validity of
biologic conclusions that will withstand the test of time and follow up experiments16.

Next-generation Sequencing
All PCR-based techniques are applied to targeting known sequences, as discussed in
PCR/qPCR/dPCR Assay Design. While sequencing methods can generate and detect “unknown”
sequence, PCRbased amplification is an important step in the generation of template for
massively parallel sequencing (MPS). Quantitative PCR approaches are used for QC and
optimization of DNA libraries and this is a key step in the generation of high-quality data. This
approach is highly sensitive and requires a very small amount of material, compared to other
methods. In addition, qPCR evaluation assures a high efficiency and thus cost effectiveness of
sequencing data. PCR is also a corner stone for template generation for popular technologies
used for resequencing of DNA and RNA. These applications are supported by design tools that
allow multiplexing of over 6,000 primers per pool and 10 ng of starting material, making
interrogation of limited human samples such as FFPE material feasible.

However, together with the trend of reduction of cost of MPS and increase in depth of coverage
per sample, nextgeneration sequencing instruments are rapidly evolving. RNASeq applications
are approaching not only sequence determination, but also quantification of transcripts and new
platforms are approaching sequencing of single molecules without amplification. When the
technology reaches this point, it may well replace PCR-based diagnostics (rapid point of care
detection of infectious pathogens or known cancer mutations such as in EGFR gene for
example). However, that is still in the future. PCR-based applications continue as a significant
work engine supporting research, development and diagnostics.
Additional Technical Support
This guide is provided to researchers to address the most common PCR related questions. In
addition to the troubleshooting guide in Troubleshooting, the Sigma-Aldrich scientific group and
technical support team is also available to assist with further support, troubleshooting or, in cases
such as when follow up experiments need to be conducted in a regulated environment,
outsourcing to reference laboratories. Our goal is to enable our customers to succeed.

References
1. Points to consider in the manufacture and testing of monoclonal antibody products for
human use (1997). U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Biologics Evaluation
and Research. J Immunother. 1997 May; 20(3): 214-43.
2. Griffiths, E. WHO requirements for the use of animal cells as in vitro substrates for the
production of biologicals: application to influenza vaccine production. In: Brown F,
Robertson JS, Shcild GC, Wood JM, editor. Inactivated Influenza Vaccines Prepared in
Cell Culture. Dev Biol Stand. Basel, Karger, 1999 vol 98, pp 153-157.
3. European Union (2001) Position statement on the use of tumourigenic cells of human
origin for the production of biological and biotechnological medicinal products, The
European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products: Evaluation of medicinal
products for human use. CPMP/BWP/1143/00.
4. OECD Principles of Good Laboratory Practice (as revised in 1997)”. OECD
Environmental Health and Safety Publications (OECD) 1. (1998).
5. Facts About Current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMPs).
http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/Manufacturing/ucm169105.ht
m.
6. Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology Q2(R1). ICH Harmonized
Tripartite Guideline. Current Step 4 version Parent Guideline dated 27 October 1994
(Complementary Guideline on Methodology dated 6 November 1996, incorporated in
November 2005).
7. Guideline on bioanalytical method validation 21 July 2011
EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009 Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use
(CHMP).
8. therascreen® EGFR RGQ PCR Kit - P120022 Approval Letter:
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf12/P120022a.pdf.
9. Abbott RealTime HCV Genotype II; Abbott RealTime HCV Genotype II Control Kit; and
Uracil-N-Glycosylase (UNG) - P120012. Approval Letter:
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf12/P120012a.pdf.
 10. THxID® - BRAF Kit for use on the ABI 7500 Fast Dx Real-Time PCR Instrument -
P120014. Approval Letter:
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf12/p120014a.pdf.
11. cobas® EGFR Mutation Test - P120019 Approval Letter:
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf12/p120019a.pdf.
12. Roche’s Rapid Mycoplasma Detection Test MycoTOOL Receives FDA Acceptance for
Release Testing of Biopharmaceutical Roche Product. PR Newswire Clinical
Trials/Medical Discoveries News <img
src=”http://pharmalicensing.com/public/img/prnewswire.gif” alt=”PR Newswire”
align=”center” class=”nitflogo” /— PENZBERG, Germany, December 19, 2012
PENZBERG, Germany, December 19, 2012 /PRNewswire/.
13. NCBI PubMed database http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/.
14. Centre for Disease Control and Prevention. Good laboratory Practices for Molecular
Genetic Testing for Heritable Disease and Conditions. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report, June 2009, Vol. 58, p.1-37, No. RR-6 www.cdc.gov/mmwr.
15. Bustin,S.A., et al., The MIQE guidelines: minimum information for publication of
quantitative real-time PCR experiments. Clin. Chem. 2009, 55: 611-622.
16. Bustin, S.A. et al., The need for transparency and good practices in the qPCR literature.
Nature Methods 2013, 10, 1063-1067.

Related Links

PCR Selection Guide

ISO 13485 Oligos

Categories

 Agriculture
 Amplification
 Antimicrobials
 Cancer
 Cell culture
 Clinical
 Cosmetics
 Degradations
 Detection methods
 Diagnostic
 Environmental
 Gene expression
 Genetic
 Indicators
 Industries
 Pesticides
 Pharmaceutical
 Polymerase chain reaction
 Polymerase chain reaction - quantitative
 Polymorphisms
 Purification
 Reductions
 Separation
 Sequencing
 Substitutions
 Transcription
 Veterinary
Service & Support
 Customer Support
 Technical Service

 Web Help Desk

 SDS
 C of A

Ordering
 Custom Products
 eCommerce Solutions

 Order Center
 Products
 Terms & Conditions of Sale

Corporate
 Business Development
 Worldwide Offices

 About Us
 Site Map
 Careers
  Events
 Programs
 Reach Regulations
 Contact Us
 Email Subscription Center

 Tool Box

PCR Laboratory