Actually, we still use BSA a lot in the US in our ancient DNA work.  In 
the past (when I was in grad school in David Glenn Smith's lab), we did 
some in-house experiments and found it does help with problematic 
extracts that seem to inhibit enzyme (Taq) activity due to coextracted 
compounds.  Since it's no too expensive, we just add it to all our aDNA 
reactions (unless we're working with ancient bovids, in which case we 
use Rabbit Serum Albumin). We haven't had a problem with it becoming 
contaminated, although in my lab our stock is aliquoted into very small 
volumes.  But if the consensus in the UK is that it's a waste of time 
and money, I'd love to see some research showing that.

best,

Rika

Dr. Frederika Kaestle
Departments of Anthropology and Biology
Indiana University, Bloomington
USA

Susannah Baldry wrote:
> Dear Odile,
>
> I am not sure which protocols in the past used BSA in the PCR mix, but 
> (after throwing your question at my office colleagues) we agree it is 
> not common now - except for some commercial enzyme kits for arrays and 
> sequencing. In the latter case you would be following manufacturer's 
> protocols which would be exhaustive. If a published paper specifies 
> the contents of the PCR reaction it should be complete & repeatable, 
> so you will be safe following their protocol as described.
>
> Good luck with your experiments,
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Susannah Baldry
>
>
> Odile Loreille wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I'm back with a second question. Reading the latest aDNA papers, I 
>> noticed that many PCR protocols don't mention BSA anymore.
>> I was wondering if you, aDNA specialists, omitted this information 
>> because you believed that the presence and amount of BSA isn't worth 
>> mentioning  or if you truly stopped using it in your amplifications.
>>
>> If you want your response to be private, please simply write to 
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Thank you very much
>>
>> Odile
>>   
>
>
>