Cargando…

Efficiency of chemical versus mechanical disruption methods of DNA extraction for the identification of oral Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria

OBJECTIVE: Clinical diagnostics often requires the detection of multiple bacterial species in limited clinical samples with a single DNA extraction method. This study aimed to compare the bacterial DNA extraction efficiency of two lysis methods automated with the MagNA-Pure LC instrument. The sample...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Xiaolan, Bosch-Tijhof, Caroline J., Wei, Xi, de Soet, Johannes J., Crielaard, Wim, van Loveren, Cor, Deng, Dong Mei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7278108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32459112
_version_ 1783543267727507456
author Li, Xiaolan
Bosch-Tijhof, Caroline J.
Wei, Xi
de Soet, Johannes J.
Crielaard, Wim
van Loveren, Cor
Deng, Dong Mei
author_facet Li, Xiaolan
Bosch-Tijhof, Caroline J.
Wei, Xi
de Soet, Johannes J.
Crielaard, Wim
van Loveren, Cor
Deng, Dong Mei
author_sort Li, Xiaolan
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Clinical diagnostics often requires the detection of multiple bacterial species in limited clinical samples with a single DNA extraction method. This study aimed to compare the bacterial DNA extraction efficiency of two lysis methods automated with the MagNA-Pure LC instrument. The samples included five oral bacterial species (three Gram-positive and two Gram-negative) with or without human saliva background. METHODS: Genomic DNA (gDNA) was extracted from bacterial cultures by bead-beating lysis (BMP) or chemical lysis (MP), followed by automated purification and measurement by quantitative PCR. RESULTS: For pure bacterial cultures, the MP method yielded higher quantities of extracted DNA and a lower detection limit than the BMP method, except where the samples contained high numbers of Gram-positive bacteria. For bacterial cultures with a saliva background, no difference in gDNA extraction efficacy was observed between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: The efficiency of a bacterial DNA extraction method is not only affected by the bacterial cell wall structure but also by the sample milieu. The MP method provided superior gDNA extraction efficiency when the samples contained a single bacterial species, whereas either of the BMP and MP methods could be applied with similar efficiencies to samples containing multiple species of bacteria.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7278108
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72781082020-06-17 Efficiency of chemical versus mechanical disruption methods of DNA extraction for the identification of oral Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria Li, Xiaolan Bosch-Tijhof, Caroline J. Wei, Xi de Soet, Johannes J. Crielaard, Wim van Loveren, Cor Deng, Dong Mei J Int Med Res Pre-Clinical Research Report OBJECTIVE: Clinical diagnostics often requires the detection of multiple bacterial species in limited clinical samples with a single DNA extraction method. This study aimed to compare the bacterial DNA extraction efficiency of two lysis methods automated with the MagNA-Pure LC instrument. The samples included five oral bacterial species (three Gram-positive and two Gram-negative) with or without human saliva background. METHODS: Genomic DNA (gDNA) was extracted from bacterial cultures by bead-beating lysis (BMP) or chemical lysis (MP), followed by automated purification and measurement by quantitative PCR. RESULTS: For pure bacterial cultures, the MP method yielded higher quantities of extracted DNA and a lower detection limit than the BMP method, except where the samples contained high numbers of Gram-positive bacteria. For bacterial cultures with a saliva background, no difference in gDNA extraction efficacy was observed between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: The efficiency of a bacterial DNA extraction method is not only affected by the bacterial cell wall structure but also by the sample milieu. The MP method provided superior gDNA extraction efficiency when the samples contained a single bacterial species, whereas either of the BMP and MP methods could be applied with similar efficiencies to samples containing multiple species of bacteria. SAGE Publications 2020-05-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7278108/ /pubmed/32459112 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Pre-Clinical Research Report
Li, Xiaolan
Bosch-Tijhof, Caroline J.
Wei, Xi
de Soet, Johannes J.
Crielaard, Wim
van Loveren, Cor
Deng, Dong Mei
Efficiency of chemical versus mechanical disruption methods of DNA extraction for the identification of oral Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria
title Efficiency of chemical versus mechanical disruption methods of DNA extraction for the identification of oral Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria
title_full Efficiency of chemical versus mechanical disruption methods of DNA extraction for the identification of oral Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria
title_fullStr Efficiency of chemical versus mechanical disruption methods of DNA extraction for the identification of oral Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria
title_full_unstemmed Efficiency of chemical versus mechanical disruption methods of DNA extraction for the identification of oral Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria
title_short Efficiency of chemical versus mechanical disruption methods of DNA extraction for the identification of oral Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria
title_sort efficiency of chemical versus mechanical disruption methods of dna extraction for the identification of oral gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria
topic Pre-Clinical Research Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7278108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32459112
work_keys_str_mv AT lixiaolan efficiencyofchemicalversusmechanicaldisruptionmethodsofdnaextractionfortheidentificationoforalgrampositiveandgramnegativebacteria
AT boschtijhofcarolinej efficiencyofchemicalversusmechanicaldisruptionmethodsofdnaextractionfortheidentificationoforalgrampositiveandgramnegativebacteria
AT weixi efficiencyofchemicalversusmechanicaldisruptionmethodsofdnaextractionfortheidentificationoforalgrampositiveandgramnegativebacteria
AT desoetjohannesj efficiencyofchemicalversusmechanicaldisruptionmethodsofdnaextractionfortheidentificationoforalgrampositiveandgramnegativebacteria
AT crielaardwim efficiencyofchemicalversusmechanicaldisruptionmethodsofdnaextractionfortheidentificationoforalgrampositiveandgramnegativebacteria
AT vanloverencor efficiencyofchemicalversusmechanicaldisruptionmethodsofdnaextractionfortheidentificationoforalgrampositiveandgramnegativebacteria
AT dengdongmei efficiencyofchemicalversusmechanicaldisruptionmethodsofdnaextractionfortheidentificationoforalgrampositiveandgramnegativebacteria