Cargando…

Comparative assessment of methods for metagenomic DNA isolation from soils of different crop growing fields

The isolation of good quality metagenomic DNA from diverse soil, in appreciable amount, is a prerequisite for metagenomics. The availability of commercial kits for isolation of genomic DNAs from soil has drastically expedited the application of metagenomics approach for identifying novel sources of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tanveer, Aiman, Yadav, Sangeeta, Yadav, Dinesh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5061652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28330292
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13205-016-0543-2
_version_ 1782459626635132928
author Tanveer, Aiman
Yadav, Sangeeta
Yadav, Dinesh
author_facet Tanveer, Aiman
Yadav, Sangeeta
Yadav, Dinesh
author_sort Tanveer, Aiman
collection PubMed
description The isolation of good quality metagenomic DNA from diverse soil, in appreciable amount, is a prerequisite for metagenomics. The availability of commercial kits for isolation of genomic DNAs from soil has drastically expedited the application of metagenomics approach for identifying novel sources of industrially important enzymes. The quantitative and qualitative assessment of metagenomic DNA isolated using either the manual method or the kit-based method should be performed prior to its use in downstream applications. The metagenomic DNA isolated from six different soil samples, using three methods, were analyzed in terms of yield, quality and downstream application as template for PCR amplification. The yield of DNA was approximately 3.52, 7.35, and 232.42 μg of DNA per gram of soil sample for the kit-based method, kit-modified method, and manual method, respectively. The manual method seems to be promising based on better yield and lesser humic acid content than the other two methods. The maximum yield was obtained in the soil collected from teak forest with all the three methods, indicating maximum microbial content and diversity. Furthermore, in terms of its suitability as template DNA for PCR amplification using 16S RNA primer, all methods are equally well. Thus, comparative assessment of three methods revealed suitability of manual method based on DNA yield and humic acid content, which could be important for many downstream applications like library preparations during metageomics approach.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5061652
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50616522016-10-14 Comparative assessment of methods for metagenomic DNA isolation from soils of different crop growing fields Tanveer, Aiman Yadav, Sangeeta Yadav, Dinesh 3 Biotech Protocols and Methods The isolation of good quality metagenomic DNA from diverse soil, in appreciable amount, is a prerequisite for metagenomics. The availability of commercial kits for isolation of genomic DNAs from soil has drastically expedited the application of metagenomics approach for identifying novel sources of industrially important enzymes. The quantitative and qualitative assessment of metagenomic DNA isolated using either the manual method or the kit-based method should be performed prior to its use in downstream applications. The metagenomic DNA isolated from six different soil samples, using three methods, were analyzed in terms of yield, quality and downstream application as template for PCR amplification. The yield of DNA was approximately 3.52, 7.35, and 232.42 μg of DNA per gram of soil sample for the kit-based method, kit-modified method, and manual method, respectively. The manual method seems to be promising based on better yield and lesser humic acid content than the other two methods. The maximum yield was obtained in the soil collected from teak forest with all the three methods, indicating maximum microbial content and diversity. Furthermore, in terms of its suitability as template DNA for PCR amplification using 16S RNA primer, all methods are equally well. Thus, comparative assessment of three methods revealed suitability of manual method based on DNA yield and humic acid content, which could be important for many downstream applications like library preparations during metageomics approach. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016-10-12 2016-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5061652/ /pubmed/28330292 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13205-016-0543-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Protocols and Methods
Tanveer, Aiman
Yadav, Sangeeta
Yadav, Dinesh
Comparative assessment of methods for metagenomic DNA isolation from soils of different crop growing fields
title Comparative assessment of methods for metagenomic DNA isolation from soils of different crop growing fields
title_full Comparative assessment of methods for metagenomic DNA isolation from soils of different crop growing fields
title_fullStr Comparative assessment of methods for metagenomic DNA isolation from soils of different crop growing fields
title_full_unstemmed Comparative assessment of methods for metagenomic DNA isolation from soils of different crop growing fields
title_short Comparative assessment of methods for metagenomic DNA isolation from soils of different crop growing fields
title_sort comparative assessment of methods for metagenomic dna isolation from soils of different crop growing fields
topic Protocols and Methods
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5061652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28330292
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13205-016-0543-2
work_keys_str_mv AT tanveeraiman comparativeassessmentofmethodsformetagenomicdnaisolationfromsoilsofdifferentcropgrowingfields
AT yadavsangeeta comparativeassessmentofmethodsformetagenomicdnaisolationfromsoilsofdifferentcropgrowingfields
AT yadavdinesh comparativeassessmentofmethodsformetagenomicdnaisolationfromsoilsofdifferentcropgrowingfields