4.3 Article

Factors affecting DNA preservation from museum-collected lepidopteran specimens

Journal

ENTOMOLOGIA EXPERIMENTALIS ET APPLICATA
Volume 120, Issue 3, Pages 239-244

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1570-7458.2006.00451.x

Keywords

insect preservation methods; DNA extraction; DNA amplification; Mamestra brassicae; Lepidoptera; Noctuidae

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent innovations in molecular genetics made DNA an intriguing molecule not only in molecular biology, but also in ecology and evolutionary and conservation biology. Despite this general interest, several discrepancies have been reported in the literature regarding the techniques for preserving insects for DNA analysis, prompting us to analyse the effects of different storage conditions on lepidopteran DNA preservation. In particular, in the present paper, adults of the cabbage moth, Mamestra brassicae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), were stored under various conditions in order to verify which method is the most suitable to preserve lepidopteran specimens for DNA studies. Mamestra brassicae adults were stored by rapid desiccation with silica gel, by preservation in acetone, 2-propanol, Carnoy's or ethanol (both at 75 and 100% concentrations) solutions, and finally by storage in an ultracold freezer and liquid nitrogen. Adults preserved by each method were used to extract DNA at the aim of verifying the size of the extracted DNAs, the extraction yield and the possibility of using these samples to amplify both short and long DNA sequences by polymerase chain reaction. The results were compared with those obtained using fresh samples acting as controls. Acetone preservation appeared to be the most recommendable method for moth specimens as it proved to be a good storage medium for DNA analysis, it is cost-effective, and it is applicable not only to field surveys, but also to obtain efficient and low-cost storage of lepidopteran specimens in museum collections.

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