Bacterial genomic dna extraction: a comparison of commercial and in house methods

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Bierhals, Nayanna Dias
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: Brixner, Betina, Silva, Karoline Schroder da, Oliveira, Caio Fernando de, Renner, Jane Dagmar Pollo
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Saúde (Santa Maria)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.ufsm.br/revistasaude/article/view/41122
Resumo: Objective: To compare and evaluate four different methods of bacterial DNA extraction. Methods: We use control strains of Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria for DNA extraction by the following methods: boiling, alkaline lysis, in house kit and commercial kit. We compare the results of quantitative and qualitative analyses, real time PCR efficiency, time, reproducibility and cost. On quantitative and qualitative analyses we observe some variations in results obtained for each strain and method, however, boiling, alkaline lysis and in house kit showed similar purity. Real time PCR results confirmed the efficiency of all methods tested. Results: Regarding time, reproducibility and cost the boiling method stood out with good results. Conclusion: The alkaline lysis method achieved better performance presenting excellent PCR amplifications, good DNA amounts, satisfactory purity, ideal time and cost and reproducibility acceptable for both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, being a very interesting option for application on laboratory routine.
id UFSM-14_3e5d0e0842f8cd722617525e30662b03
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/41122
network_acronym_str UFSM-14
network_name_str Saúde (Santa Maria)
repository_id_str
spelling Bacterial genomic dna extraction: a comparison of commercial and in house methodsExtração de dna genômico bacteriano: uma comparação de métodos comerciais e in houseBacterial DNAReal time PCRGram-positive bacteriaGram-negative bacteria.DNA bacterianoPCR em tempo realBactérias Gram-negativasBactérias Gram-positivas.Objective: To compare and evaluate four different methods of bacterial DNA extraction. Methods: We use control strains of Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria for DNA extraction by the following methods: boiling, alkaline lysis, in house kit and commercial kit. We compare the results of quantitative and qualitative analyses, real time PCR efficiency, time, reproducibility and cost. On quantitative and qualitative analyses we observe some variations in results obtained for each strain and method, however, boiling, alkaline lysis and in house kit showed similar purity. Real time PCR results confirmed the efficiency of all methods tested. Results: Regarding time, reproducibility and cost the boiling method stood out with good results. Conclusion: The alkaline lysis method achieved better performance presenting excellent PCR amplifications, good DNA amounts, satisfactory purity, ideal time and cost and reproducibility acceptable for both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, being a very interesting option for application on laboratory routine.Objetivo: Comparar e avaliar quatro diferentes métodos de extração de DNA bacteriano. Métodos: Foram utilizadas cepas de bactérias Gram positivas e Gram negativas para extração do DNA pelos seguintes métodos: fervura, lise alcalina, kit in house e kit comercial; de modo a comparar os resultados referentes as análises quantitativas e qualitativas, eficiência na PCR em tempo real, tempo, reprodutibilidade e custo. Resultados: Na análise quantitativa e qualitativa, pode-se observar que houve variações em relação aos resultados obtidos para cada amostra e para cada extração, no entanto, os métodos de fervura, lise alcalina e do kit in house apresentaram, em geral, purezas semelhantes. Já nos resultados obtidos pela PCR em tempo real todos os métodos se mostraram eficientes. Ainda, em relação ao tempo, reprodutibilidade e custo o método por fervura se destacou nos três comparativos. Conclusão: Pode-se perceber que o método de lise alcalina ganhou destaque em todos os comparativos avaliados, apresentando amplificações excelentes na PCR, boas quantidades de DNA, pureza satisfatória, tempo ideal e custo e reprodutibilidade consideráveis, tanto para bactérias Gram positivas como Gram negativas, sendo uma opção interessante para aplicação na rotina laboratorial.Universidade Federal de Santa Maria2020-11-08info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufsm.br/revistasaude/article/view/4112210.5902/2236583441122Saúde (Santa Maria); 2020: Revista Saúde (Santa Maria). 2020, v. 46, n. 2Saúde (Santa Maria); 2020: Revista Saúde (Santa Maria). 2020, v. 46, n. 22236-58340103-4499reponame:Saúde (Santa Maria)instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)instacron:UFSMporhttps://periodicos.ufsm.br/revistasaude/article/view/41122/pdfCopyright (c) 2020 Saúde (Santa Maria)info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBierhals, Nayanna DiasBrixner, BetinaSilva, Karoline Schroder daOliveira, Caio Fernando deRenner, Jane Dagmar Pollo2020-11-09T00:10:53Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/41122Revistahttps://periodicos.ufsm.br/revistasaudePUBhttps://periodicos.ufsm.br/revistasaude/oairevistasaude.ufsm@gmail.com || amanda.revsaude@gmail.com || beatriz.revsaude@gmail.com2236-58342236-5834opendoar:2020-11-09T00:10:53Saúde (Santa Maria) - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Bacterial genomic dna extraction: a comparison of commercial and in house methods
Extração de dna genômico bacteriano: uma comparação de métodos comerciais e in house
title Bacterial genomic dna extraction: a comparison of commercial and in house methods
spellingShingle Bacterial genomic dna extraction: a comparison of commercial and in house methods
Bierhals, Nayanna Dias
Bacterial DNA
Real time PCR
Gram-positive bacteria
Gram-negative bacteria.
DNA bacteriano
PCR em tempo real
Bactérias Gram-negativas
Bactérias Gram-positivas.
title_short Bacterial genomic dna extraction: a comparison of commercial and in house methods
title_full Bacterial genomic dna extraction: a comparison of commercial and in house methods
title_fullStr Bacterial genomic dna extraction: a comparison of commercial and in house methods
title_full_unstemmed Bacterial genomic dna extraction: a comparison of commercial and in house methods
title_sort Bacterial genomic dna extraction: a comparison of commercial and in house methods
author Bierhals, Nayanna Dias
author_facet Bierhals, Nayanna Dias
Brixner, Betina
Silva, Karoline Schroder da
Oliveira, Caio Fernando de
Renner, Jane Dagmar Pollo
author_role author
author2 Brixner, Betina
Silva, Karoline Schroder da
Oliveira, Caio Fernando de
Renner, Jane Dagmar Pollo
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Bierhals, Nayanna Dias
Brixner, Betina
Silva, Karoline Schroder da
Oliveira, Caio Fernando de
Renner, Jane Dagmar Pollo
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Bacterial DNA
Real time PCR
Gram-positive bacteria
Gram-negative bacteria.
DNA bacteriano
PCR em tempo real
Bactérias Gram-negativas
Bactérias Gram-positivas.
topic Bacterial DNA
Real time PCR
Gram-positive bacteria
Gram-negative bacteria.
DNA bacteriano
PCR em tempo real
Bactérias Gram-negativas
Bactérias Gram-positivas.
description Objective: To compare and evaluate four different methods of bacterial DNA extraction. Methods: We use control strains of Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria for DNA extraction by the following methods: boiling, alkaline lysis, in house kit and commercial kit. We compare the results of quantitative and qualitative analyses, real time PCR efficiency, time, reproducibility and cost. On quantitative and qualitative analyses we observe some variations in results obtained for each strain and method, however, boiling, alkaline lysis and in house kit showed similar purity. Real time PCR results confirmed the efficiency of all methods tested. Results: Regarding time, reproducibility and cost the boiling method stood out with good results. Conclusion: The alkaline lysis method achieved better performance presenting excellent PCR amplifications, good DNA amounts, satisfactory purity, ideal time and cost and reproducibility acceptable for both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, being a very interesting option for application on laboratory routine.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-11-08
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.ufsm.br/revistasaude/article/view/41122
10.5902/2236583441122
url https://periodicos.ufsm.br/revistasaude/article/view/41122
identifier_str_mv 10.5902/2236583441122
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.ufsm.br/revistasaude/article/view/41122/pdf
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Saúde (Santa Maria)
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Saúde (Santa Maria)
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Saúde (Santa Maria); 2020: Revista Saúde (Santa Maria). 2020, v. 46, n. 2
Saúde (Santa Maria); 2020: Revista Saúde (Santa Maria). 2020, v. 46, n. 2
2236-5834
0103-4499
reponame:Saúde (Santa Maria)
instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)
instacron:UFSM
instname_str Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)
instacron_str UFSM
institution UFSM
reponame_str Saúde (Santa Maria)
collection Saúde (Santa Maria)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Saúde (Santa Maria) - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revistasaude.ufsm@gmail.com || amanda.revsaude@gmail.com || beatriz.revsaude@gmail.com
_version_ 1799944001353154560