Cargando…
A comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologies
The ability for safe and rapid pathogenic sample transportation and subsequent detection is an increasing challenge throughout the world. Herein, we describe and use bead-beating, vortex, sonication, 903 protein saver cards, and Lyse-It methods, aiming to inactivate Gram-positive and -negative bacte...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6650070/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31335892 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220102 |
_version_ | 1783438091720065024 |
---|---|
author | Santaus, Tonya M. Li, Shan Saha, Lahari Chen, Wilbur H. Bhagat, Siya Stine, O. Colin Geddes, Chris D. |
author_facet | Santaus, Tonya M. Li, Shan Saha, Lahari Chen, Wilbur H. Bhagat, Siya Stine, O. Colin Geddes, Chris D. |
author_sort | Santaus, Tonya M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The ability for safe and rapid pathogenic sample transportation and subsequent detection is an increasing challenge throughout the world. Herein, we describe and use bead-beating, vortex, sonication, 903 protein saver cards, and Lyse-It methods, aiming to inactivate Gram-positive and -negative bacteria with subsequent genome DNA (quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction) qPCR detection. The basic concepts behind the four chosen technologies is their versatility, cost, and ease of use in developed and underdeveloped countries. The four methods target the testing of bacterial resilience, cellular extraction from general and complex media and subsequent DNA extraction for qPCR detection and amplification. These results demonstrate that conventional high temperature heating, 903 protein saver cards, and Lyse-It are all viable options for inactivating bacterial growth for safe shipping. Additionally, Lyse-It was found to be particularly useful as this technology can inactivate bacteria, extract cells from 903 protein saver cards, lyse bacterial cells, and additionally keep genomic DNA viable for qPCR detection. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6650070 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66500702019-07-25 A comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologies Santaus, Tonya M. Li, Shan Saha, Lahari Chen, Wilbur H. Bhagat, Siya Stine, O. Colin Geddes, Chris D. PLoS One Research Article The ability for safe and rapid pathogenic sample transportation and subsequent detection is an increasing challenge throughout the world. Herein, we describe and use bead-beating, vortex, sonication, 903 protein saver cards, and Lyse-It methods, aiming to inactivate Gram-positive and -negative bacteria with subsequent genome DNA (quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction) qPCR detection. The basic concepts behind the four chosen technologies is their versatility, cost, and ease of use in developed and underdeveloped countries. The four methods target the testing of bacterial resilience, cellular extraction from general and complex media and subsequent DNA extraction for qPCR detection and amplification. These results demonstrate that conventional high temperature heating, 903 protein saver cards, and Lyse-It are all viable options for inactivating bacterial growth for safe shipping. Additionally, Lyse-It was found to be particularly useful as this technology can inactivate bacteria, extract cells from 903 protein saver cards, lyse bacterial cells, and additionally keep genomic DNA viable for qPCR detection. Public Library of Science 2019-07-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6650070/ /pubmed/31335892 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220102 Text en © 2019 Santaus et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Santaus, Tonya M. Li, Shan Saha, Lahari Chen, Wilbur H. Bhagat, Siya Stine, O. Colin Geddes, Chris D. A comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologies |
title | A comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologies |
title_full | A comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologies |
title_fullStr | A comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologies |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologies |
title_short | A comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologies |
title_sort | comparison of lyse-it to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and dna fragmentation technologies |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6650070/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31335892 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220102 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT santaustonyam acomparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT lishan acomparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT sahalahari acomparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT chenwilburh acomparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT bhagatsiya acomparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT stineocolin acomparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT geddeschrisd acomparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT santaustonyam comparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT lishan comparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT sahalahari comparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT chenwilburh comparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT bhagatsiya comparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT stineocolin comparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies AT geddeschrisd comparisonoflyseittoothercellularsamplepreparationbacteriallysinganddnafragmentationtechnologies |