4.3 Article

Improved protocol for the simultaneous extraction and column-based separation of DNA and RNA from different soils

Journal

JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGICAL METHODS
Volume 84, Issue 3, Pages 406-412

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2010.12.028

Keywords

DNA/RNA extraction; DNA/RNA separation; nosZ; qPCR; T-RFLP

Funding

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG)
  2. TUM Graduate School's Faculty Graduate Center Weihenstephan at Technische Universitat Munchen, Germany

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We developed an improved protocol, allowing the simultaneous extraction of DNA and RNA from soil using phenol-chloroform with subsequent column-based separation of DNA and RNA (PCS). We compared this new approach with the well established protocol published by Griffiths et al. (2000), where DNA and RNA are separated by selective enzymatic digestions and two commercial kits used for DNA or RNA extraction, respectively, using four different agricultural soils. We compared yield and purity of the nucleic acids as well as abundance and diversity profiles of the soil bacterial communities targeting the nosZ gene via quantitative real-time PCR and terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism on DNA and RNA level. The newly developed protocol provided purer nucleic acid extracts compared to the used kit-based protocols. All protocols were suitable for DNA- and RNA-based gene quantification, however high variations between replicates were obtained for RNA samples using the original Griffiths protocol. Diversity patterns of nosZ were highly influenced by the extraction protocol used both on the DNA and RNA level. Finally, our data showed that the new protocol allows a simultaneous and reproducible extraction and separation of DNA and RNA, which were suitable for reliable analyses of gene and transcript copy numbers and diversity pattern. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available