Affiliation:
1. Laboratory for Biology of Secondary Metabolism, Institute of Microbiology of the ASCR v.v.i., Videnska 1083, CZ-14220 Prague 4, Czech Republic
2. Institute of Applied Mathematics and Information Technologies, Faculty of Sciences, Charles University in Prague, Albertov 6, CZ-12843 Prague 2, Czech Republic
Abstract
ABSTRACT
Seven methods of soil DNA extraction and purification were tested in a set of 14 soils differing in bedrock, texture, pH, salinity, moisture, organic matter content, and vegetation cover. The methods introduced in this study included pretreatment of soil with CaCO
3
or purification of extracted DNA by CaCl
2
. The performance of innovated methods was compared to that of the commercial kit Mo Bio PowerSoil and the phenol-chloroform-based method of D. N. Miller, J. E. Bryant, E. L. Madsen, and W. C. Ghiorse (Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65:4715-4724, 1999). This study demonstrated significant differences between the tested methods in terms of DNA yield, PCR performance, and recovered bacterial diversity. The differences in DNA yields were correlated to vegetation cover, soil pH, and clay content. The differences in PCR performances were correlated to vegetation cover and soil pH. The innovative methods improved PCR performance in our set of soils, in particular for forest acidic soils. PCR was successful in 95% of cases by the method using CaCl
2
purification and in 93% of cases by the method based on CaCO
3
pretreatment, but only in 79% by Mo Bio PowerSoil, for our range of soils. Also, the innovative methods recovered a higher percentage of actinomycete diversity from a subset of three soils. Recommendations include the assessment of soil characteristics prior to selecting the optimal protocol for soil DNA extraction and purification.
Publisher
American Society for Microbiology
Subject
Ecology,Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology,Food Science,Biotechnology
Reference29 articles.
1. Abdo, Z., U. M. E. Schüette, S. J. Bent, C. J. Williams, L. J. Forney, and P. Joyce. 2006. Statistical methods for characterizing diversity of microbial communities by analysis of terminal restriction fragment length polymorphisms of 16S rRNA genes. Environ. Microbiol.8:929-938.
2. Ashelford, K. E., A. J. Weightman, and J. C. Fry. 2002. PRIMROSE: a computer program for generating and estimating the phylogenetic range of 16S rRNA oligonucleotide probes and primers in conjunction with the RDP-II database. Nucleic Acids Res.30:3481-3489.
3. Bakken, L. R., and V. Lindahl. 1995. Recovery of bacterial cells from soil, p. 9-27. In J. D. van Elsas and J. T. Trevors (ed.), Nucleic acids in the environment: methods and applications. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany.
4. Braid, M. D., L. M. Daniels, and C. L. Kitts. 2003. Removal of PCR inhibitors from soil DNA by chemical flocculation. J. Microbiol. Methods52:389-393.
5. Burgmann, H., M. Pesaro, F. Widmer, and J. Zeyer. 2001. A strategy for optimizing quality and quantity of DNA extracted from soil. J. Microbiol. Methods45:7-20.
Cited by
195 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献