Literature DB >> 24495734

Comparison of three common DNA concentration measurement methods.

Xiaofei Li1, Yuhua Wu1, Li Zhang1, Yinglong Cao1, Yunjing Li1, Jun Li1, Li Zhu1, Gang Wu2.   

Abstract

Accurate measurement of DNA concentration is important for DNA-based biological applications. DNA concentration is usually determined by the ultraviolet (UV) absorption, fluorescence staining, and diphenylamine reaction methods. However, the best method for quality assurance of measurements is unknown. Here, we comprehensively compared these methods using different types of samples. We found that all three methods accurately determined the concentrations of high-purity DNA solutions. After digestion of DNA samples, concentration measurements revealed that the PicoGreen dye method was very sensitive to the degradation of DNA. The three methods displayed different anti-jamming ability when contaminants such as transfer RNA (tRNA), protein, and organic chemicals were included in DNA solutions. The diphenylamine reaction method gave the highest accuracy, with an average error of approximately 10% between measured and true values. The PicoGreen dye method was influenced by tRNA and protein, and the UV absorption method was susceptible to all kinds of impurities. Overall, the diphenylamine reaction method gave the most accurate results when DNA was mixed with contaminants, the PicoGreen dye method was most suitable for degraded DNA samples or DNA extracted from processed products, and the UV absorbance method was best for evaluating the impurities in DNA solutions.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Comparison; DNA concentration measurement; Diphenylamine reaction; PicoGreen dye; UV absorption

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24495734     DOI: 10.1016/j.ab.2014.01.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anal Biochem        ISSN: 0003-2697            Impact factor:   3.365


  6 in total

1.  Limitations of methods for measuring the concentration of human genomic DNA and oligonucleotide samples.

Authors:  Hua-Jun He; Erica V Stein; Paul DeRose; Kenneth D Cole
Journal:  Biotechniques       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 1.993

Review 2.  Metagenomic applications in exploration and development of novel enzymes from nature: a review.

Authors:  Fitra Adi Prayogo; Anto Budiharjo; Hermin Pancasakti Kusumaningrum; Wijanarka Wijanarka; Agung Suprihadi; Nurhayati Nurhayati
Journal:  J Genet Eng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-08-04

3.  DNA Source Selection for Downstream Applications Based on DNA Quality Indicators Analysis.

Authors:  Gema Lucena-Aguilar; Ana María Sánchez-López; Cristina Barberán-Aceituno; José Antonio Carrillo-Ávila; José Antonio López-Guerrero; Rocío Aguilar-Quesada
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2016-05-09       Impact factor: 2.300

4.  A Microneedle Functionalized with Polyethyleneimine and Nanotubes for Highly Sensitive, Label-Free Quantification of DNA.

Authors:  Darius Saadat-Moghaddam; Jong-Hoon Kim
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 3.576

5.  Comparison of Different Drying Methods for Recovery of Mushroom DNA.

Authors:  Shouxian Wang; Yu Liu; Jianping Xu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-06-07       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Filter paper-based spin column method for cost-efficient DNA or RNA purification.

Authors:  Rui Shi; Ramsey S Lewis; Dilip R Panthee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-07       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.