Diego Medina Caro, Lucas Horstmann, Lars Ganzert, Romulo Oses, Thomas Friedl, Dirk Wagner
{"title":"An improved method for intracellular DNA (iDNA) recovery from terrestrial environments","authors":"Diego Medina Caro, Lucas Horstmann, Lars Ganzert, Romulo Oses, Thomas Friedl, Dirk Wagner","doi":"10.1002/mbo3.1369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The simultaneous extraction of intracellular DNA (iDNA) and extracellular DNA (eDNA) can help to separate the living in situ community (represented by iDNA) from background DNA that originated both from past communities and from allochthonous sources. As iDNA and eDNA extraction protocols require separating cells from the sample matrix, their DNA yields are generally lower than direct methods that lyse the cells within the sample matrix. We, therefore, tested different buffers with and without adding a detergent mix (DM) in the extraction protocol to improve the recovery of iDNA from surface and subsurface samples that covered a variety of terrestrial environments. The combination of a highly concentrated sodium phosphate buffer plus DM significantly improved iDNA recovery for almost all tested samples. Additionally, the combination of sodium phosphate and EDTA improved iDNA recovery in most of the samples and even allowed the successful extraction of iDNA from extremely low-biomass iron-bearing rock samples taken from the deep biosphere. Based on our results, we recommend using a protocol with sodium phosphate in combination with either a DM (NaP 300 mM + DM) or EDTA (NaP + EDTA 300 mM). Furthermore, for studies that rely on the eDNA pool, we recommend using buffers solely based on sodium phosphate because the addition of EDTA or a DM resulted in a decrease in eDNA for most of the tested samples. These improvements can help reduce community bias in environmental studies and contribute to better characterizations of both modern and past ecosystems.</p>","PeriodicalId":18573,"journal":{"name":"MicrobiologyOpen","volume":"12 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/mbo3.1369","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MicrobiologyOpen","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mbo3.1369","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The simultaneous extraction of intracellular DNA (iDNA) and extracellular DNA (eDNA) can help to separate the living in situ community (represented by iDNA) from background DNA that originated both from past communities and from allochthonous sources. As iDNA and eDNA extraction protocols require separating cells from the sample matrix, their DNA yields are generally lower than direct methods that lyse the cells within the sample matrix. We, therefore, tested different buffers with and without adding a detergent mix (DM) in the extraction protocol to improve the recovery of iDNA from surface and subsurface samples that covered a variety of terrestrial environments. The combination of a highly concentrated sodium phosphate buffer plus DM significantly improved iDNA recovery for almost all tested samples. Additionally, the combination of sodium phosphate and EDTA improved iDNA recovery in most of the samples and even allowed the successful extraction of iDNA from extremely low-biomass iron-bearing rock samples taken from the deep biosphere. Based on our results, we recommend using a protocol with sodium phosphate in combination with either a DM (NaP 300 mM + DM) or EDTA (NaP + EDTA 300 mM). Furthermore, for studies that rely on the eDNA pool, we recommend using buffers solely based on sodium phosphate because the addition of EDTA or a DM resulted in a decrease in eDNA for most of the tested samples. These improvements can help reduce community bias in environmental studies and contribute to better characterizations of both modern and past ecosystems.
期刊介绍:
MicrobiologyOpen is a peer reviewed, fully open access, broad-scope, and interdisciplinary journal delivering rapid decisions and fast publication of microbial science, a field which is undergoing a profound and exciting evolution in this post-genomic era.
The journal aims to serve the research community by providing a vehicle for authors wishing to publish quality research in both fundamental and applied microbiology. Our goal is to publish articles that stimulate discussion and debate, as well as add to our knowledge base and further the understanding of microbial interactions and microbial processes.
MicrobiologyOpen gives prompt and equal consideration to articles reporting theoretical, experimental, applied, and descriptive work in all aspects of bacteriology, virology, mycology and protistology, including, but not limited to:
- agriculture
- antimicrobial resistance
- astrobiology
- biochemistry
- biotechnology
- cell and molecular biology
- clinical microbiology
- computational, systems, and synthetic microbiology
- environmental science
- evolutionary biology, ecology, and systematics
- food science and technology
- genetics and genomics
- geobiology and earth science
- host-microbe interactions
- infectious diseases
- natural products discovery
- pharmaceutical and medicinal chemistry
- physiology
- plant pathology
- veterinary microbiology
We will consider submissions across unicellular and cell-cluster organisms: prokaryotes (bacteria, archaea) and eukaryotes (fungi, protists, microalgae, lichens), as well as viruses and prions infecting or interacting with microorganisms, plants and animals, including genetic, biochemical, biophysical, bioinformatic and structural analyses.
The journal features Original Articles (including full Research articles, Method articles, and Short Communications), Commentaries, Reviews, and Editorials. Original papers must report well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the article. We also support confirmatory research and aim to work with authors to meet reviewer expectations.
MicrobiologyOpen publishes articles submitted directly to the journal and those referred from other Wiley journals.