Cargando…

A comparison of freezer‐stored DNA and herbarium tissue samples for chloroplast assembly and genome skimming

PREMISE: The use of DNA from herbarium specimens is an increasingly important source for evolutionary studies in plant biology, particularly in cases where species are rare or difficult to obtain. Here we compare the utility of DNA from herbarium tissues to their freezer‐stored DNA counterparts via...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McAssey, Edward V., Downs, Cassidy, Yorkston, Mitsuko, Morden, Clifford, Heyduk, Karolina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278930/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37342160
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aps3.11527
_version_ 1785060570873987072
author McAssey, Edward V.
Downs, Cassidy
Yorkston, Mitsuko
Morden, Clifford
Heyduk, Karolina
author_facet McAssey, Edward V.
Downs, Cassidy
Yorkston, Mitsuko
Morden, Clifford
Heyduk, Karolina
author_sort McAssey, Edward V.
collection PubMed
description PREMISE: The use of DNA from herbarium specimens is an increasingly important source for evolutionary studies in plant biology, particularly in cases where species are rare or difficult to obtain. Here we compare the utility of DNA from herbarium tissues to their freezer‐stored DNA counterparts via the Hawaiian Plant DNA Library. METHODS: Plants collected for the Hawaiian Plant DNA Library were simultaneously accessioned as herbarium specimens at the time of collection, from 1994–2019. Paired samples were sequenced using short‐read sequencing and assessed for chloroplast assembly and nuclear gene recovery. RESULTS: Herbarium specimen–derived DNA was statistically more fragmented than freezer‐stored DNA derived from fresh tissue, leading to poorer chloroplast assembly and overall lower coverage. The number of nuclear targets recovered varied mostly by total sequencing reads per library and age of specimen, but not by storage method (herbarium or long‐term freezer). Although there was evidence of DNA damage in the samples, there was no evidence that it was related to the length of time in storage, whether frozen or as herbarium specimens. DISCUSSION: DNA extracted from herbarium tissues will continue to be invaluable, despite being highly fragmented and degraded. Rare floras would benefit from both traditional herbarium storage methods and extracted DNA freezer banks.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10278930
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102789302023-06-20 A comparison of freezer‐stored DNA and herbarium tissue samples for chloroplast assembly and genome skimming McAssey, Edward V. Downs, Cassidy Yorkston, Mitsuko Morden, Clifford Heyduk, Karolina Appl Plant Sci Application Articles PREMISE: The use of DNA from herbarium specimens is an increasingly important source for evolutionary studies in plant biology, particularly in cases where species are rare or difficult to obtain. Here we compare the utility of DNA from herbarium tissues to their freezer‐stored DNA counterparts via the Hawaiian Plant DNA Library. METHODS: Plants collected for the Hawaiian Plant DNA Library were simultaneously accessioned as herbarium specimens at the time of collection, from 1994–2019. Paired samples were sequenced using short‐read sequencing and assessed for chloroplast assembly and nuclear gene recovery. RESULTS: Herbarium specimen–derived DNA was statistically more fragmented than freezer‐stored DNA derived from fresh tissue, leading to poorer chloroplast assembly and overall lower coverage. The number of nuclear targets recovered varied mostly by total sequencing reads per library and age of specimen, but not by storage method (herbarium or long‐term freezer). Although there was evidence of DNA damage in the samples, there was no evidence that it was related to the length of time in storage, whether frozen or as herbarium specimens. DISCUSSION: DNA extracted from herbarium tissues will continue to be invaluable, despite being highly fragmented and degraded. Rare floras would benefit from both traditional herbarium storage methods and extracted DNA freezer banks. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-06-05 /pmc/articles/PMC10278930/ /pubmed/37342160 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aps3.11527 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Applications in Plant Sciences published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Botanical Society of America. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Application Articles
McAssey, Edward V.
Downs, Cassidy
Yorkston, Mitsuko
Morden, Clifford
Heyduk, Karolina
A comparison of freezer‐stored DNA and herbarium tissue samples for chloroplast assembly and genome skimming
title A comparison of freezer‐stored DNA and herbarium tissue samples for chloroplast assembly and genome skimming
title_full A comparison of freezer‐stored DNA and herbarium tissue samples for chloroplast assembly and genome skimming
title_fullStr A comparison of freezer‐stored DNA and herbarium tissue samples for chloroplast assembly and genome skimming
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of freezer‐stored DNA and herbarium tissue samples for chloroplast assembly and genome skimming
title_short A comparison of freezer‐stored DNA and herbarium tissue samples for chloroplast assembly and genome skimming
title_sort comparison of freezer‐stored dna and herbarium tissue samples for chloroplast assembly and genome skimming
topic Application Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278930/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37342160
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aps3.11527
work_keys_str_mv AT mcasseyedwardv acomparisonoffreezerstoreddnaandherbariumtissuesamplesforchloroplastassemblyandgenomeskimming
AT downscassidy acomparisonoffreezerstoreddnaandherbariumtissuesamplesforchloroplastassemblyandgenomeskimming
AT yorkstonmitsuko acomparisonoffreezerstoreddnaandherbariumtissuesamplesforchloroplastassemblyandgenomeskimming
AT mordenclifford acomparisonoffreezerstoreddnaandherbariumtissuesamplesforchloroplastassemblyandgenomeskimming
AT heydukkarolina acomparisonoffreezerstoreddnaandherbariumtissuesamplesforchloroplastassemblyandgenomeskimming
AT mcasseyedwardv comparisonoffreezerstoreddnaandherbariumtissuesamplesforchloroplastassemblyandgenomeskimming
AT downscassidy comparisonoffreezerstoreddnaandherbariumtissuesamplesforchloroplastassemblyandgenomeskimming
AT yorkstonmitsuko comparisonoffreezerstoreddnaandherbariumtissuesamplesforchloroplastassemblyandgenomeskimming
AT mordenclifford comparisonoffreezerstoreddnaandherbariumtissuesamplesforchloroplastassemblyandgenomeskimming
AT heydukkarolina comparisonoffreezerstoreddnaandherbariumtissuesamplesforchloroplastassemblyandgenomeskimming