Cargando…

Wildlife pathogen detection: evaluation of alternative DNA extraction protocols

Accurate detection of wildlife pathogens is critical in wildlife disease research. False negatives or positives can have catastrophic consequences for conservation and disease-mitigation decisions. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction is commonly used for molecular detection of wildlife pathogens....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mantzana-Oikonomaki, Vasiliki, Maan, Martine, Sabino-Pinto, Joana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8529346/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34693021
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biomethods/bpab018
_version_ 1784586452437303296
author Mantzana-Oikonomaki, Vasiliki
Maan, Martine
Sabino-Pinto, Joana
author_facet Mantzana-Oikonomaki, Vasiliki
Maan, Martine
Sabino-Pinto, Joana
author_sort Mantzana-Oikonomaki, Vasiliki
collection PubMed
description Accurate detection of wildlife pathogens is critical in wildlife disease research. False negatives or positives can have catastrophic consequences for conservation and disease-mitigation decisions. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction is commonly used for molecular detection of wildlife pathogens. The reliability of this method depends on the effective extraction of the pathogen’s DNA from host samples. A wildlife disease that has been in the centre of conservationist’s attention is the amphibian disease Chytridiomycosis, caused by the fungal pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd). Here, we compare the efficiency of a spin column extraction kit (QIAGEN), commonly used in Bd DNA extraction, to an alternative spin column kit (BIOKÈ) used in extractions from other types of samples, which is considerably cheaper but not typically used for Bd DNA extraction. Additionally, we explore the effect of an enzymatic pre-treatment on detection efficiency. Both methods showed similar efficiency when extracting Bd DNA from zoospores from laboratory-created cell-cultures, as well as higher efficiency when combined with the enzymatic pre-treatment. Our results indicate that selecting the optimal method for DNA extraction is essential to ensure minimal false negatives and reduce project costs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8529346
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85293462021-10-22 Wildlife pathogen detection: evaluation of alternative DNA extraction protocols Mantzana-Oikonomaki, Vasiliki Maan, Martine Sabino-Pinto, Joana Biol Methods Protoc Methods Article Accurate detection of wildlife pathogens is critical in wildlife disease research. False negatives or positives can have catastrophic consequences for conservation and disease-mitigation decisions. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction is commonly used for molecular detection of wildlife pathogens. The reliability of this method depends on the effective extraction of the pathogen’s DNA from host samples. A wildlife disease that has been in the centre of conservationist’s attention is the amphibian disease Chytridiomycosis, caused by the fungal pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd). Here, we compare the efficiency of a spin column extraction kit (QIAGEN), commonly used in Bd DNA extraction, to an alternative spin column kit (BIOKÈ) used in extractions from other types of samples, which is considerably cheaper but not typically used for Bd DNA extraction. Additionally, we explore the effect of an enzymatic pre-treatment on detection efficiency. Both methods showed similar efficiency when extracting Bd DNA from zoospores from laboratory-created cell-cultures, as well as higher efficiency when combined with the enzymatic pre-treatment. Our results indicate that selecting the optimal method for DNA extraction is essential to ensure minimal false negatives and reduce project costs. Oxford University Press 2021-09-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8529346/ /pubmed/34693021 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biomethods/bpab018 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Methods Article
Mantzana-Oikonomaki, Vasiliki
Maan, Martine
Sabino-Pinto, Joana
Wildlife pathogen detection: evaluation of alternative DNA extraction protocols
title Wildlife pathogen detection: evaluation of alternative DNA extraction protocols
title_full Wildlife pathogen detection: evaluation of alternative DNA extraction protocols
title_fullStr Wildlife pathogen detection: evaluation of alternative DNA extraction protocols
title_full_unstemmed Wildlife pathogen detection: evaluation of alternative DNA extraction protocols
title_short Wildlife pathogen detection: evaluation of alternative DNA extraction protocols
title_sort wildlife pathogen detection: evaluation of alternative dna extraction protocols
topic Methods Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8529346/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34693021
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biomethods/bpab018
work_keys_str_mv AT mantzanaoikonomakivasiliki wildlifepathogendetectionevaluationofalternativednaextractionprotocols
AT maanmartine wildlifepathogendetectionevaluationofalternativednaextractionprotocols
AT sabinopintojoana wildlifepathogendetectionevaluationofalternativednaextractionprotocols