Comparison of RNA extraction methods from biofilm samples of Staphylococcus epidermidis

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: França, Ângela
Data de Publicação: 2011
Outros Autores: Melo, Luís D. R., Cerca, Nuno
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/1822/22283
Resumo: BACKGROUND: Microbial biofilms are communities of bacteria adhered to a surface and surrounded by an extracellular polymeric matrix. Biofilms have been associated with increased antibiotic resistance and tolerance to the immune system. Staphylococcus epidermidis is the major bacterial species found in biofilm-related infections on indwelling medical devices. Obtaining high quality mRNA from biofilms is crucial to validate the transcriptional measurements associated with the switching to the biofilm mode of growth. Therefore, we selected three commercially available RNA extraction kits with distinct characteristics, including those using silica membrane or organic extraction methods, and enzymatic or mechanical cell lysis, and evaluated the RNA quality obtained from two distinct S. epidermidis bacterial biofilms. RESULTS: RNA extracted using the different kits was evaluated for quantity, purity, integrity, and functionally. All kits were able to extract intact and functional total RNA from the biofilms generated from each S. epidermidis strain. The results demonstrated that the kit based on mechanical lysis and organic extraction (FastRNA® Pro Blue) was the only one that was able to isolate pure and large quantities of RNA. Normalized expression of the icaA virulence gene showed that RNA extracted with PureLink™ had a significant lower concentration of icaA mRNA transcripts than the other kits tested. CONCLUSIONS: When working with complex samples, such as biofilms, that contain a high content extracellular polysaccharide and proteins, special care should be taken when selecting the appropriate RNA extraction system, in order to obtain accurate, reproducible, and biologically significant results. Among the RNA extraction kits tested, FastRNA® Pro Blue was the best option for both S. epidermidis biofilms used.
id RCAP_3c598b78c79c7600b3c7dc9848d7c514
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt:1822/22283
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Comparison of RNA extraction methods from biofilm samples of Staphylococcus epidermidisBACKGROUND: Microbial biofilms are communities of bacteria adhered to a surface and surrounded by an extracellular polymeric matrix. Biofilms have been associated with increased antibiotic resistance and tolerance to the immune system. Staphylococcus epidermidis is the major bacterial species found in biofilm-related infections on indwelling medical devices. Obtaining high quality mRNA from biofilms is crucial to validate the transcriptional measurements associated with the switching to the biofilm mode of growth. Therefore, we selected three commercially available RNA extraction kits with distinct characteristics, including those using silica membrane or organic extraction methods, and enzymatic or mechanical cell lysis, and evaluated the RNA quality obtained from two distinct S. epidermidis bacterial biofilms. RESULTS: RNA extracted using the different kits was evaluated for quantity, purity, integrity, and functionally. All kits were able to extract intact and functional total RNA from the biofilms generated from each S. epidermidis strain. The results demonstrated that the kit based on mechanical lysis and organic extraction (FastRNA® Pro Blue) was the only one that was able to isolate pure and large quantities of RNA. Normalized expression of the icaA virulence gene showed that RNA extracted with PureLink™ had a significant lower concentration of icaA mRNA transcripts than the other kits tested. CONCLUSIONS: When working with complex samples, such as biofilms, that contain a high content extracellular polysaccharide and proteins, special care should be taken when selecting the appropriate RNA extraction system, in order to obtain accurate, reproducible, and biologically significant results. Among the RNA extraction kits tested, FastRNA® Pro Blue was the best option for both S. epidermidis biofilms used.(undefined)BioMed Central (BMC)Universidade do MinhoFrança, ÂngelaMelo, Luís D. R.Cerca, Nuno2011-062011-06-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/1822/22283eng1756-050010.1186/1756-0500-4-572info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-07-21T12:52:38Zoai:repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt:1822/22283Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T19:51:48.394221Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of RNA extraction methods from biofilm samples of Staphylococcus epidermidis
title Comparison of RNA extraction methods from biofilm samples of Staphylococcus epidermidis
spellingShingle Comparison of RNA extraction methods from biofilm samples of Staphylococcus epidermidis
França, Ângela
title_short Comparison of RNA extraction methods from biofilm samples of Staphylococcus epidermidis
title_full Comparison of RNA extraction methods from biofilm samples of Staphylococcus epidermidis
title_fullStr Comparison of RNA extraction methods from biofilm samples of Staphylococcus epidermidis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of RNA extraction methods from biofilm samples of Staphylococcus epidermidis
title_sort Comparison of RNA extraction methods from biofilm samples of Staphylococcus epidermidis
author França, Ângela
author_facet França, Ângela
Melo, Luís D. R.
Cerca, Nuno
author_role author
author2 Melo, Luís D. R.
Cerca, Nuno
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Minho
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv França, Ângela
Melo, Luís D. R.
Cerca, Nuno
description BACKGROUND: Microbial biofilms are communities of bacteria adhered to a surface and surrounded by an extracellular polymeric matrix. Biofilms have been associated with increased antibiotic resistance and tolerance to the immune system. Staphylococcus epidermidis is the major bacterial species found in biofilm-related infections on indwelling medical devices. Obtaining high quality mRNA from biofilms is crucial to validate the transcriptional measurements associated with the switching to the biofilm mode of growth. Therefore, we selected three commercially available RNA extraction kits with distinct characteristics, including those using silica membrane or organic extraction methods, and enzymatic or mechanical cell lysis, and evaluated the RNA quality obtained from two distinct S. epidermidis bacterial biofilms. RESULTS: RNA extracted using the different kits was evaluated for quantity, purity, integrity, and functionally. All kits were able to extract intact and functional total RNA from the biofilms generated from each S. epidermidis strain. The results demonstrated that the kit based on mechanical lysis and organic extraction (FastRNA® Pro Blue) was the only one that was able to isolate pure and large quantities of RNA. Normalized expression of the icaA virulence gene showed that RNA extracted with PureLink™ had a significant lower concentration of icaA mRNA transcripts than the other kits tested. CONCLUSIONS: When working with complex samples, such as biofilms, that contain a high content extracellular polysaccharide and proteins, special care should be taken when selecting the appropriate RNA extraction system, in order to obtain accurate, reproducible, and biologically significant results. Among the RNA extraction kits tested, FastRNA® Pro Blue was the best option for both S. epidermidis biofilms used.
publishDate 2011
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2011-06
2011-06-01T00:00:00Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/1822/22283
url http://hdl.handle.net/1822/22283
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 1756-0500
10.1186/1756-0500-4-572
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv BioMed Central (BMC)
publisher.none.fl_str_mv BioMed Central (BMC)
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799133107743358976