Literature DB >> 22182593

Extraction platform evaluations: a comparison of AutoMate Express™, EZ1® Advanced XL, and Maxwell® 16 Bench-top DNA extraction systems.

Carey P Davis1, Jonathan L King, Bruce Budowle, Arthur J Eisenberg, Meredith A Turnbough.   

Abstract

The DNA extraction performance of three low-throughput extraction systems was evaluated. The instruments and respective chemistries all use a similar extraction methodology that involves binding DNA to a coated magnetic resin in the presence of chaotropic salt, washing of the resin to remove undesirable compounds, and elution of DNA from the particles in a low-salt solution. The AutoMate Express™ (Life Technologies Corporation, Carlsbad, CA), EZ1® Advanced XL (Qiagen Inc., Valencia, CA), and Maxwell® 16 (Promega Corporation, Madison, WI) were compared using a variety of samples including: blood on swabs, blood on denim, blood on cotton, blood mixed with inhibitors (a mixture of indigo, hematin, humic acid, and urban dust) on cotton, blood on FTA® paper, saliva residue on cigarette butt paper, epithelial cells on cotton swabs, neat semen on cotton, hair roots, bones, and teeth. Each instrument had a recommended pre-processing protocol for each sample type, and these protocols were followed strictly to reduce user bias. All extractions were performed in triplicate for each sample type. The three instruments were compared on the basis of quantity of DNA recovered (as determined by real-time PCR), relative level of inhibitors present in the extract (shown as shifts in the C(T) value for the internal PCR control in the real-time PCR assay), STR peak heights, use of consumables not included in the extraction kits, ease of use, and application flexibility. All three systems performed well; however extraction efficiency varied by sample type and with the preprocessing protocol applied to the various samples.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22182593     DOI: 10.1016/j.legalmed.2011.09.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Leg Med (Tokyo)        ISSN: 1344-6223            Impact factor:   1.376


  3 in total

1.  Comparison of an automated nucleic acid extraction system with the column-based procedure.

Authors:  Hagen Frickmann; Rebecca Hinz; Ralf Matthias Hagen
Journal:  Eur J Microbiol Immunol (Bp)       Date:  2015-03-26

2.  Effective removal of co-purified inhibitors from extracted DNA samples using synchronous coefficient of drag alteration (SCODA) technology.

Authors:  Sarah Schmedes; Pamela Marshall; Jonathan L King; Bruce Budowle
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2012-12-20       Impact factor: 2.686

3.  Improved resolution of mixed STR profiles using a fully automated differential cell lysis/DNA extraction method.

Authors:  Matthew C Goldstein; Jordan O Cox; Lori B Seman; Tracey Dawson Cruz
Journal:  Forensic Sci Res       Date:  2019-08-20
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.