Cargando…

Comparison of three rapid and easy bacterial DNA extraction methods for use with quantitative real-time PCR

The development of fast and easy on-site molecular detection and quantification methods for hazardous microbes on solid surfaces is desirable for several applications where specialised laboratory facilities are absent. The quantification of bacterial contamination necessitates the assessment of the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Tongeren, S. P., Degener, J. E., Harmsen, H. J. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3181010/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21311936
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10096-011-1191-4
_version_ 1782212717981990912
author van Tongeren, S. P.
Degener, J. E.
Harmsen, H. J. M.
author_facet van Tongeren, S. P.
Degener, J. E.
Harmsen, H. J. M.
author_sort van Tongeren, S. P.
collection PubMed
description The development of fast and easy on-site molecular detection and quantification methods for hazardous microbes on solid surfaces is desirable for several applications where specialised laboratory facilities are absent. The quantification of bacterial contamination necessitates the assessment of the efficiency of the used methodology as a whole, including the preceding steps of sampling and sample processing. We used quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qrtPCR) for Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus to measure the recovery of DNA from defined numbers of bacterial cells that were subjected to three different DNA extraction methods: the QIAamp® DNA Mini Kit, Reischl et al.’s method and FTA® Elute. FTA® Elute significantly showed the highest median DNA extraction efficiency of 76.9% for E. coli and 108.9% for S. aureus. The Reischl et al. method and QIAamp® DNA Mini Kit inhibited the E. coli qrtPCR assay with a 10-fold decrease of detectable DNA. None of the methods inhibited the S. aureus qrtPCR assay. The FTA® Elute applicability was demonstrated with swab samples taken from the International Space Station (ISS) interior. Overall, the FTA® Elute method was found to be the most suitable to selected criteria in terms of rapidity, easiness of use, DNA extraction efficiency, toxicity, and transport and storage conditions. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10096-011-1191-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3181010
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31810102011-09-30 Comparison of three rapid and easy bacterial DNA extraction methods for use with quantitative real-time PCR van Tongeren, S. P. Degener, J. E. Harmsen, H. J. M. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Article The development of fast and easy on-site molecular detection and quantification methods for hazardous microbes on solid surfaces is desirable for several applications where specialised laboratory facilities are absent. The quantification of bacterial contamination necessitates the assessment of the efficiency of the used methodology as a whole, including the preceding steps of sampling and sample processing. We used quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qrtPCR) for Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus to measure the recovery of DNA from defined numbers of bacterial cells that were subjected to three different DNA extraction methods: the QIAamp® DNA Mini Kit, Reischl et al.’s method and FTA® Elute. FTA® Elute significantly showed the highest median DNA extraction efficiency of 76.9% for E. coli and 108.9% for S. aureus. The Reischl et al. method and QIAamp® DNA Mini Kit inhibited the E. coli qrtPCR assay with a 10-fold decrease of detectable DNA. None of the methods inhibited the S. aureus qrtPCR assay. The FTA® Elute applicability was demonstrated with swab samples taken from the International Space Station (ISS) interior. Overall, the FTA® Elute method was found to be the most suitable to selected criteria in terms of rapidity, easiness of use, DNA extraction efficiency, toxicity, and transport and storage conditions. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10096-011-1191-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer-Verlag 2011-02-11 2011 /pmc/articles/PMC3181010/ /pubmed/21311936 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10096-011-1191-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2011 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Article
van Tongeren, S. P.
Degener, J. E.
Harmsen, H. J. M.
Comparison of three rapid and easy bacterial DNA extraction methods for use with quantitative real-time PCR
title Comparison of three rapid and easy bacterial DNA extraction methods for use with quantitative real-time PCR
title_full Comparison of three rapid and easy bacterial DNA extraction methods for use with quantitative real-time PCR
title_fullStr Comparison of three rapid and easy bacterial DNA extraction methods for use with quantitative real-time PCR
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of three rapid and easy bacterial DNA extraction methods for use with quantitative real-time PCR
title_short Comparison of three rapid and easy bacterial DNA extraction methods for use with quantitative real-time PCR
title_sort comparison of three rapid and easy bacterial dna extraction methods for use with quantitative real-time pcr
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3181010/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21311936
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10096-011-1191-4
work_keys_str_mv AT vantongerensp comparisonofthreerapidandeasybacterialdnaextractionmethodsforusewithquantitativerealtimepcr
AT degenerje comparisonofthreerapidandeasybacterialdnaextractionmethodsforusewithquantitativerealtimepcr
AT harmsenhjm comparisonofthreerapidandeasybacterialdnaextractionmethodsforusewithquantitativerealtimepcr