| Literature DB >> 23537338 |
Raja Rajakani1, Lokesh Narnoliya, Neelam Singh Sangwan, Rajender Singh Sangwan, Vikrant Gupta.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High quality RNA is a primary requisite for numerous molecular biological applications but is difficult to isolate from several plants rich in polysaccharides, polyphenolics and other secondary metabolites. These compounds either bind with nucleic acids or often co-precipitate at the final step and many times cannot be removed by conventional methods and kits. Addition of vinyl-pyrollidone polymers in extraction buffer efficiently removes polyphenolics to some extent, but, it failed in case of Azadirachta indica and several other medicinal and aromatic plants.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23537338 PMCID: PMC3626780 DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-6-125
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Figure 1Denaturing agarose gel electrophoresis of total RNA isolated from and other plant tissues using modified CTAB-based methods. (A) Quality of total RNA isolated by using modified extraction buffer containing only PVPP and precipitation done by using glacial acetic acid. (B) RNA isolated by using modified extraction buffer containing only activated charcoal and precipitation done by using glacial acetic acid. (C) RNA extracted by using modified extraction buffer containing activated charcoal as well as PVPP followed by glacial acetic acid precipitation. (D) RNA extracted by using modified extraction buffer containing activated charcoal as well as PVPP followed by 2.5 M Lithium Chloride precipitation. (E, F) RNA extracted from different tissues of Azadirachta indica and other medicinal and aromatic plants by using our modified and optimized protocol.
Purity and yield of total RNA extracted from different plant tissues using our modified RNA extraction procedure
| 1 | Immature fruit | 1.87 ± 0.02 | 2.32 ± 0.15 | 112 ± 25 | ||
| | | Mature fruit | 1.99 ± 0.08 | 1.81 ± 0.03 | 341 ± 56 | |
| | | Young leaf | 1.92 ± 0.04 | 2.25 ± 0.07 | 354 ± 36 | |
| | | Mature leaf | 1.90 ± 0.09 | 1.77 ± 0.07 | 107 ± 70 | |
| | | Fruit endocarp | 2.04 ± 0.07 | 2.15 ± 0.06 | 234 ± 31 | |
| | | Fruit mesocarp | 2.02 ± 0.16 | 2.06 ± 0.03 | 45 ± 15 | |
| 2 | Leaf | 1.91 ± 0.06 | 2.24 ± 0.09 | 288 ± 21 | ||
| 3 | Leaf | 1.86 ± 0.05 | 2.14 ± 0.03 | 10 ± 1 | ||
| 4 | Leaf | 1.80 ± 0.09 | 1.67 ± 0.06 | 100 ± 22 | ||
| 5 | Buds | 1.79 ± 0.17 | 1.53 ± 0.63 | 14 ± 4 | ||
| | | Flowers | 1.84 ± 0.14 | 1.75 ± 0.16 | 28 ± 11 | |
| 6 | Leaf | 2.01 ± 0.11 | 1.87 ± 0.05 | 122 ± 18 | ||
| 7 | Leaf | 1.95 ± 0.02 | 2.13 ± 0.10 | 213 ± 20 | ||
| | | Leaf | 1.96 ± 0.07 | 2.36 ± 0.06 | 181 ± 58 | |
| 8 | Leaf | 1.94 ± 0.04 | 2.26 ± 0.22 | 216 ± 33 | ||
| | | Leaf | 1.95 ± 0.16 | 2.44 ± 0.21 | 70 ± 27 | |
| 9 | Leaf | 2.02 ± 0.17 | 2.43 ± 0.05 | 80 ± 7 | ||
| 10 | Leaf | 1.93 ± 0.04 | 1.97 ± 0.03 | 256 ± 33 | ||
| | | Leaf | 1.84 ± 0.02 | 1.92 ± 0.01 | 302 ± 33 | |
| | | Leaf | 1.86 ± 0.03 | 2.05 ± 0.06 | 203 ± 55 | |
| | | Leaf | 1.93 ± 0.01 | 2.37 ± 0.10 | 177 ± 23 | |
| | | Leaf | 1.82 ± 0.13 | 2.20 ± 0.24 | 219 ± 53 | |
| 11 | Leaf | 1.87 ± 0.10 | 2.22 ± 0.09 | 262 ± 23 | ||
| | | Leaf | 1.95 ± 0.12 | 2.46 ± 0.07 | 105 ± 35 | |
| 12 | Leaf | 1.92 ± 0.10 | 2.31 ± 0.10 | 291 ± 25 | ||
| 13 | Leaf | 1.88 ± 0.09 | 2.14 ± 0.13 | 214 ± 28 | ||
| | | Leaf | 1.94 ± 0.08 | 2.35 ± 0.25 | 90 ± 14 | |
| 14 | Leaf | 2.06 ± 0.06 | 2.28 ± 0.05 | 194 ± 64 |
The RNA yield was calculated based on the following formula: yield = A 260 × 40 × 1,000 × volume (μl)/material weight (g). Each value indicates the mean of 3 (n = 3) replicates and standard error (±SE). The statistical analysis was performed by SPSS 11.5 software.
Figure 2Electrophoresis of total RNA prepared by our modified method from various tissues by using Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer. (A) Bioanalyzer gel image of small RNA ladder and A. indica tissues. (B-E) Bioanalyzer generated electropherograms of A. indica immature fruit, mature fruit, mesocarp and endocarp. The corresponding RNA Integrity Number (RIN) and ribosomal ratios are also indicated.
Figure 3Construction of subtractive cDNA libraries and RT-PCR. (A) Purification of mRNA from A. indica tissues. (B, C) Primary and secondary PCR for immature fruit-enriched (B) and leaf-enriched (C) subtractive cDNA library. (D) Restriction digestion of plasmids isolated randomly from immature fruit-enriched subtractive cDNA library. (E) RT-PCR of cytochrome P450-like gene (a candidate in our library) by using the cDNA made from the total RNA isolated from different tissues of A. indica by our modified method. (F) Restriction digestion releasing the cytochrome P450-like gene fragment from the TA cloning vector (pGEMT-Easy) confirming its successful cloning.