Literature DB >> 29056447

Comparison of ten different DNA extraction procedures with respect to their suitability for environmental samples.

Ramona Kuhn1, Jörg Böllmann2, Kathrin Krahl2, Isaac Mbir Bryant2, Marion Martienssen2.   

Abstract

DNA extraction for molecular biological applications usually requires target optimized extraction procedures depending on the origin of the samples. For environmental samples, a range of different procedures has been developed. We compared the applicability and efficiency of ten selected DNA extraction methods published in recent literature using four different environmental samples namely: activated sludge from a domestic wastewater treatment plant, river sediment, anaerobic digestion sludge and nitrifying enrichment culture. We assessed the suitability of the extraction procedures based on both DNA yield and quality. DNA quantification was performed by both ultra violet (UV) spectrophotometry and fluorescence spectrophotometry after staining with PicoGreen. In our study, DNA yields based on UV measurement were overestimated in most cases while DNA yields from fluorescence measurements correlated well with the sample load on agarose gels of crude DNA. The quality of the DNA extracts was determined by gel electrophoresis of crude DNA and PCR products from 16S rDNA with the universal primer set 27f/1525r. It was observed that gel electrophoresis of crude DNA was not always suitable to evaluate DNA integrity and purity since interfering background substances (e.g. humic substances) were not visible. Therefore, we strongly recommend examining the DNA quality of both crude DNA and 16S rDNA PCR products by gel electrophoresis when a new extraction method is established. Summarizing, we found four out of ten extraction procedures being applicable to all tested samples without noticeable restrictions. The procedure G (according to the standard method 432_10401 of the Lower Saxony State Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety) had the broadest application range over procedure J (published by Wilson, 2001). These were followed by procedures F (Singka et al., 2012) and A (Bourrain et al., 1999). All four extraction procedures delivered reliable and reproducible crude DNA and PCR products. From an economical point of view, all procedures tested during this study were cheaper compared to commercial DNA extraction kits.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DNA extraction; DNA quantification; DNA yield; Environmental samples; Gel electrophoresis; PicoGreen

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29056447     DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2017.10.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Microbiol Methods        ISSN: 0167-7012            Impact factor:   2.363


  3 in total

1.  Data on DNA gel sample load, gel electrophoresis, PCR and cost analysis.

Authors:  Ramona Kuhn; Jörg Böllmann; Kathrin Krahl; Isaac Mbir Bryant; Marion Martienssen
Journal:  Data Brief       Date:  2017-12-05

2.  Biases in Prokaryotic Community Amplicon Sequencing Affected by DNA Extraction Methods in Both Saline and Non-saline Soil.

Authors:  Kehui Xie; Yong Deng; Xuze Zhang; Xueting Wang; Guangbo Kang; Liang Bai; He Huang
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 5.640

3.  cloudSPAdes: assembly of synthetic long reads using de Bruijn graphs.

Authors:  Ivan Tolstoganov; Anton Bankevich; Zhoutao Chen; Pavel A Pevzner
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 6.937

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.