Literature DB >> 21815819

Comparison of commercial DNA extraction kits for isolation and purification of bacterial and eukaryotic DNA from PAH-contaminated soils.

Nagissa Mahmoudi1, Greg F Slater, Roberta R Fulthorpe.   

Abstract

Molecular characterization of the microbial populations of soils and sediments contaminated with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) is often a first step in assessing intrinsic biodegradation potential. However, soils are problematic for molecular analysis owing to the presence of organic matter, such as humic acids. Furthermore, the presence of contaminants, such as PAHs, can cause further challenges to DNA extraction, quantification, and amplification. The goal of our study was to compare the effectiveness of four commercial soil DNA extraction kits (UltraClean Soil DNA Isolation kit, PowerSoil DNA Isolation kit, PowerMax Soil DNA Isolation kit, and FastDNA SPIN kit) to extract pure, high-quality bacterial and eukaryotic DNA from PAH-contaminated soils. Six different contaminated soils were used to determine if there were any biases among the kits due to soil properties or level of contamination. Extracted DNA was used as a template for bacterial 16S rDNA and eukaryotic 18S rDNA amplifications, and PCR products were subsequently analyzed using denaturing gel gradient electrophoresis (DGGE). We found that the FastDNA SPIN kit provided significantly higher DNA yields for all soils; however, it also resulted in the highest levels of humic acid contamination. Soil texture and organic carbon content of the soil did not affect the DNA yield of any kit. Moreover, a liquid-liquid extraction of the DNA extracts found no residual PAHs, indicating that all kits were effective at removing contaminants in the extraction process. Although the PowerSoil DNA Isolation kit gave relatively low DNA yields, it provided the highest quality DNA based on successful amplification of both bacterial and eukaryotic DNA for all six soils. DGGE fingerprints among the kits were dramatically different for both bacterial and eukaryotic DNA. The PowerSoil DNA Isolation kit revealed multiple bands for each soil and provided the most consistent DGGE profiles among replicates for both bacterial and eukaryotic DNA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21815819     DOI: 10.1139/w11-049

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Microbiol        ISSN: 0008-4166            Impact factor:   2.419


  13 in total

1.  Exploring the Root Microbiome: Extracting Bacterial Community Data from the Soil, Rhizosphere, and Root Endosphere.

Authors:  Tuesday Simmons; Daniel F Caddell; Siwen Deng; Devin Coleman-Derr
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 1.355

2.  DNA-magnetic Particle Binding Analysis by Dynamic and Electrophoretic Light Scattering.

Authors:  Yazan Haddad; Simona Dostalova; Jiri Kudr; Ondrej Zitka; Zbynek Heger; Vojtech Adam
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 1.355

3.  Assessment of fecal DNA extraction protocols for metagenomic studies.

Authors:  Fangming Yang; Jihua Sun; Huainian Luo; Huahui Ren; Hongcheng Zhou; Yuxiang Lin; Mo Han; Bing Chen; Hailong Liao; Susanne Brix; Junhua Li; Huanming Yang; Karsten Kristiansen; Huanzi Zhong
Journal:  Gigascience       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 6.524

4.  Comparative evaluation of different molecular methods for DNA extraction from individual Teladorsagia circumcincta nematodes.

Authors:  S Sloan; C J Jenvey; D Piedrafita; S Preston; M J Stear
Journal:  BMC Biotechnol       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 2.563

5.  Modification of a commercial DNA extraction kit for safe and rapid recovery of DNA and RNA simultaneously from soil, without the use of harmful solvents.

Authors:  E Tournier; L Amenc; A L Pablo; E Legname; E Blanchart; C Plassard; A Robin; L Bernard
Journal:  MethodsX       Date:  2015-03-27

6.  Transparent DNA/RNA Co-extraction Workflow Protocol Suitable for Inhibitor-Rich Environmental Samples That Focuses on Complete DNA Removal for Transcriptomic Analyses.

Authors:  Natalie Y N Lim; Constance A Roco; Åsa Frostegård
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2016-10-18       Impact factor: 5.640

7.  Profiling soil microbial communities with next-generation sequencing: the influence of DNA kit selection and technician technical expertise.

Authors:  Taha Soliman; Sung-Yin Yang; Tomoko Yamazaki; Holger Jenke-Kodama
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 2.984

8.  Metagenomic analysis of a southern maritime antarctic soil.

Authors:  David A Pearce; Kevin K Newsham; Michael A S Thorne; Leo Calvo-Bado; Martin Krsek; Paris Laskaris; Andy Hodson; Elizabeth M Wellington
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2012-12-05       Impact factor: 5.640

9.  Comparison of different protocols for the extraction of microbial DNA from reef corals.

Authors:  H F Santos; F L Carmo; D C A Leite; H E Jesus; P De Carvalho Maalouf; C Almeida; A U Soriano; D Altomari; L Suhett; V Vólaro; E Valoni; M Francisco; J Vieira; R Rocha; B L Sardinha; L B Mendes; R R João; B Lacava; R F Jesus; G V Sebastian; A Pessoa; J D van Elsas; R P Rezende; D O Pires; G Duarte; C B Castro; A S Rosado; R S Peixoto
Journal:  Braz J Microbiol       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 2.476

10.  Soil pretreatment and fast cell lysis for direct polymerase chain reaction from forest soils for terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of fungal communities.

Authors:  Fei Cheng; Lin Hou; Keith Woeste; Zhengchun Shang; Xiaobang Peng; Peng Zhao; Shuoxin Zhang
Journal:  Braz J Microbiol       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 2.476

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.