基于总产率和微生物多样性的低生物量样品DNA纯化方法的比较分析

MYRON T. LA DUC, SHARIFF OSMAN, KASTHURI VENKATESWARAN
{"title":"基于总产率和微生物多样性的低生物量样品DNA纯化方法的比较分析","authors":"MYRON T. LA DUC,&nbsp;SHARIFF OSMAN,&nbsp;KASTHURI VENKATESWARAN","doi":"10.1111/j.1745-4581.2009.00153.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> ABSTRACT</h3>\n \n <p> <i>Despite advances in the specificity and sensitivity of molecular biological technologies, the efficient recovery of DNA from low-biomass samples remains extremely challenging. Optimal methods to purify biomolecules from such environments should (1) achieve the greatest total yield and (2) reflect the true microbial diversity of the sample. These attributes were assessed from five DNA purification regimes: a standard-manual procedure, MoBio Ultraclean and Promega Wizard kits, and an automated Axcyte AutoLyser method with and without bead-beating agitation. A homogenous mixture of known concentrations of nine distinct bacterial lineages isolated from low-biomass environments was prepared and suitable aliquots of subsamples were processed in parallel. DNA products from each of these methods were then subjected to polymerase chain reaction (PCR), quantitative PCR and 16S rRNA clone-library analysis. The Axcyte AutoLyser outperformed all other purification regimes examined. This automated method consistently both yielded the highest concentration of PCR-amplifiable DNA, and reported species composition most consistent with the starting solution.</i> </p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS</h3>\n \n <p>This communication carefully examines the effectiveness of common DNA purification regimes as well as an automated method. Comparative analyses convincingly demonstrate that the different methods not only result in different recovery of genomic DNA, but more importantly, different estimations of microbial diversity in the sample. This report will hopefully inspire investigators from various industries (pharmaceutical, ecological, medical, semiconductor, etc.) who find themselves in the initial phases of large-scale studies to devote a significant effort into optimizing sample extraction protocols to achieve the most accurate information.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50067,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rapid Methods and Automation in Microbiology","volume":"17 3","pages":"350-368"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1745-4581.2009.00153.x","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF METHODS FOR THE PURIFICATION OF DNA FROM LOW-BIOMASS SAMPLES BASED ON TOTAL YIELD AND CONSERVED MICROBIAL DIVERSITY\",\"authors\":\"MYRON T. LA DUC,&nbsp;SHARIFF OSMAN,&nbsp;KASTHURI VENKATESWARAN\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/j.1745-4581.2009.00153.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> ABSTRACT</h3>\\n \\n <p> <i>Despite advances in the specificity and sensitivity of molecular biological technologies, the efficient recovery of DNA from low-biomass samples remains extremely challenging. Optimal methods to purify biomolecules from such environments should (1) achieve the greatest total yield and (2) reflect the true microbial diversity of the sample. These attributes were assessed from five DNA purification regimes: a standard-manual procedure, MoBio Ultraclean and Promega Wizard kits, and an automated Axcyte AutoLyser method with and without bead-beating agitation. A homogenous mixture of known concentrations of nine distinct bacterial lineages isolated from low-biomass environments was prepared and suitable aliquots of subsamples were processed in parallel. DNA products from each of these methods were then subjected to polymerase chain reaction (PCR), quantitative PCR and 16S rRNA clone-library analysis. The Axcyte AutoLyser outperformed all other purification regimes examined. This automated method consistently both yielded the highest concentration of PCR-amplifiable DNA, and reported species composition most consistent with the starting solution.</i> </p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS</h3>\\n \\n <p>This communication carefully examines the effectiveness of common DNA purification regimes as well as an automated method. Comparative analyses convincingly demonstrate that the different methods not only result in different recovery of genomic DNA, but more importantly, different estimations of microbial diversity in the sample. This report will hopefully inspire investigators from various industries (pharmaceutical, ecological, medical, semiconductor, etc.) who find themselves in the initial phases of large-scale studies to devote a significant effort into optimizing sample extraction protocols to achieve the most accurate information.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50067,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rapid Methods and Automation in Microbiology\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"350-368\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1745-4581.2009.00153.x\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Rapid Methods and Automation in Microbiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-4581.2009.00153.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rapid Methods and Automation in Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-4581.2009.00153.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

尽管分子生物学技术在特异性和敏感性方面取得了进步,但从低生物量样品中高效回收DNA仍然极具挑战性。从这种环境中纯化生物分子的最佳方法应该(1)达到最大的总产量(2)反映样品的真实微生物多样性。这些属性是通过五种DNA纯化方案进行评估的:标准手动程序,MoBio Ultraclean和Promega Wizard试剂盒,以及自动Axcyte autotolyser方法(有和没有跳动搅拌)。从低生物量环境中分离出已知浓度的9种不同细菌谱系的均匀混合物,并平行处理合适的等量亚样品。然后对每种方法的DNA产物进行聚合酶链反应(PCR)、定量PCR和16S rRNA克隆文库分析。Axcyte AutoLyser优于所有其他的纯化方法。这种自动化方法一致地产生了最高浓度的pcr扩增DNA,并且报告的物种组成与起始溶液最一致。本通讯仔细检查了常见的DNA纯化制度以及自动化方法的有效性。对比分析令人信服地表明,不同的方法不仅导致基因组DNA的不同恢复,更重要的是,样品中微生物多样性的不同估计。本报告将有望激励各个行业(制药,生态,医疗,半导体等)的研究人员,他们发现自己处于大规模研究的初始阶段,投入大量精力优化样品提取方案,以获得最准确的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF METHODS FOR THE PURIFICATION OF DNA FROM LOW-BIOMASS SAMPLES BASED ON TOTAL YIELD AND CONSERVED MICROBIAL DIVERSITY

ABSTRACT

Despite advances in the specificity and sensitivity of molecular biological technologies, the efficient recovery of DNA from low-biomass samples remains extremely challenging. Optimal methods to purify biomolecules from such environments should (1) achieve the greatest total yield and (2) reflect the true microbial diversity of the sample. These attributes were assessed from five DNA purification regimes: a standard-manual procedure, MoBio Ultraclean and Promega Wizard kits, and an automated Axcyte AutoLyser method with and without bead-beating agitation. A homogenous mixture of known concentrations of nine distinct bacterial lineages isolated from low-biomass environments was prepared and suitable aliquots of subsamples were processed in parallel. DNA products from each of these methods were then subjected to polymerase chain reaction (PCR), quantitative PCR and 16S rRNA clone-library analysis. The Axcyte AutoLyser outperformed all other purification regimes examined. This automated method consistently both yielded the highest concentration of PCR-amplifiable DNA, and reported species composition most consistent with the starting solution.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

This communication carefully examines the effectiveness of common DNA purification regimes as well as an automated method. Comparative analyses convincingly demonstrate that the different methods not only result in different recovery of genomic DNA, but more importantly, different estimations of microbial diversity in the sample. This report will hopefully inspire investigators from various industries (pharmaceutical, ecological, medical, semiconductor, etc.) who find themselves in the initial phases of large-scale studies to devote a significant effort into optimizing sample extraction protocols to achieve the most accurate information.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Rapid Methods and Automation in Microbiology
Journal of Rapid Methods and Automation in Microbiology 生物-生物工程与应用微生物
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Underreporting and Underrepresentation of Race and Ethnicity in Head and Neck Cancer Trials, 2010-2020: A Systematic Review. RobotBASIC Control Architecture Model in Mobile Robots for the Development of Navigation Routes in Structured Environments Robot Double Adaptive Self-Organizing Organisms Using a Bio-Inspired Gene Regulatory Network Controller
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1