It is a cliche of freshman biology labs to point out that "every cycle of PCR doubles the DNA, so the yield will be $2^{cycles}$ times the template amount". However, if this were true, 1 ng of template would generate about 35 billion ng after 35 cycles, or 35 grams of DNA. This is clearly absurd and not the case.
Of course, the power-of-2 claim is a gross oversimplification (if anything, it is an upper bound - but even so, a very uninformative one), and in practice, yields will fall far short of it because:
- Every single duplex of DNA does not denature at each cycle
- Primers do not bind to every single molecule of DNA at each cycle
- Not every DNA strand gets bound by a polymerase at every cycle
- Not every polymerase that binds manages to complete the entire product in time in every cycle
- The reaction inhibits itself by depleting dNTPs
- The heat denatures the reaction by degrading enzyme
In fact, cursory examination of qPCR output often follows saturation kinetics:
Mathematical methods for modeling qPCR are obviously well developed.
My question is about ordinary PCR: Is it possible get a reasonable expectation of nanogram yield for an ordinary PCR done in a tabletop cycler, with typical PCR reagents?
For instance, when amplifying from a plasmid, I would like to calculate how many cycles to do, how much template to use, and how much product to load on the agarose gel to ensure that I will be able to clearly distinguish exponential amplification (both primers anneal), linear amplification (only one primer anneals), and no amplification (neither primer can anneal or the reaction did not work).