从蜘蛛网中提取脊椎动物DNA的方法评价

IF 6.2 Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Joshua P. Newton, Morten E. Allentoft, Philip W. Bateman, Matthew A. Campbell, Mahsa Mousavi-Derazmahalleh, Paul Nevill
{"title":"从蜘蛛网中提取脊椎动物DNA的方法评价","authors":"Joshua P. Newton,&nbsp;Morten E. Allentoft,&nbsp;Philip W. Bateman,&nbsp;Matthew A. Campbell,&nbsp;Mahsa Mousavi-Derazmahalleh,&nbsp;Paul Nevill","doi":"10.1002/edn3.70122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Spider webs have recently been recognized as an excellent source of vertebrate eDNA. Here we compare four sample preparation methods and three commercially available DNA extraction kits to optimize vertebrate eDNA recovery. We assessed DNA yield, purity, and fragment length before amplification, as well as vertebrate ZOTU richness and community composition after sequencing. Our results demonstrate that both sample preparation and extraction kit significantly influence DNA recovery from spider webs. Digestion of webs in ATL buffer with proteinase K for 72 h, followed by extraction with a column-based Blood &amp; Tissue kit, yielded the highest mean DNA concentration (10.6 ng/μL) with a mean ZOTU richness of 11.8 ZOTUs per sample. The same digestion method paired with magnetic bead-based extraction produced lower mean DNA concentrations (6.19 ng/μL) but achieved the highest mean ZOTU richness (14.8 ZOTUs per sample). Increased proteinase K concentrations and longer digest times did not significantly improve DNA yield or species richness. Washing webs with phosphate buffer solution combined with PowerLyzer PowerSoil column-based extraction kit produced the lowest total DNA yield (0.16 ng/μL) and richness per sample (1 ZOTU). Although the bead-beating preparation method produced high total DNA yield, it often recovered the lowest mean ZOTU richness, indicating the presence of DNA from non-target taxa such as bacteria. Overall, digestion with ATL buffer and proteinase K (irrespective of digest time), combined with either the Blood &amp; Tissue or MagMAX Microbiome kits, increased vertebrate species detections from spider webs.</p>","PeriodicalId":52828,"journal":{"name":"Environmental DNA","volume":"7 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/edn3.70122","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Extraction Methods for the Recovery of Vertebrate DNA From Spider Webs\",\"authors\":\"Joshua P. Newton,&nbsp;Morten E. Allentoft,&nbsp;Philip W. Bateman,&nbsp;Matthew A. Campbell,&nbsp;Mahsa Mousavi-Derazmahalleh,&nbsp;Paul Nevill\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/edn3.70122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Spider webs have recently been recognized as an excellent source of vertebrate eDNA. Here we compare four sample preparation methods and three commercially available DNA extraction kits to optimize vertebrate eDNA recovery. We assessed DNA yield, purity, and fragment length before amplification, as well as vertebrate ZOTU richness and community composition after sequencing. Our results demonstrate that both sample preparation and extraction kit significantly influence DNA recovery from spider webs. Digestion of webs in ATL buffer with proteinase K for 72 h, followed by extraction with a column-based Blood &amp; Tissue kit, yielded the highest mean DNA concentration (10.6 ng/μL) with a mean ZOTU richness of 11.8 ZOTUs per sample. The same digestion method paired with magnetic bead-based extraction produced lower mean DNA concentrations (6.19 ng/μL) but achieved the highest mean ZOTU richness (14.8 ZOTUs per sample). Increased proteinase K concentrations and longer digest times did not significantly improve DNA yield or species richness. Washing webs with phosphate buffer solution combined with PowerLyzer PowerSoil column-based extraction kit produced the lowest total DNA yield (0.16 ng/μL) and richness per sample (1 ZOTU). Although the bead-beating preparation method produced high total DNA yield, it often recovered the lowest mean ZOTU richness, indicating the presence of DNA from non-target taxa such as bacteria. Overall, digestion with ATL buffer and proteinase K (irrespective of digest time), combined with either the Blood &amp; Tissue or MagMAX Microbiome kits, increased vertebrate species detections from spider webs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":52828,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental DNA\",\"volume\":\"7 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/edn3.70122\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental DNA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/edn3.70122\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental DNA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/edn3.70122","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近,人们认识到蜘蛛网是脊椎动物eDNA的重要来源。在这里,我们比较了四种样品制备方法和三种市售DNA提取试剂盒,以优化脊椎动物eDNA的恢复。我们在扩增前评估了DNA产量、纯度和片段长度,测序后评估了脊椎动物ZOTU的丰富度和群落组成。我们的研究结果表明,样品制备和提取试剂盒对从蜘蛛网中提取DNA有显著影响。用蛋白酶K在ATL缓冲液中消化蛛网72 h,然后用柱状Blood &;组织试剂盒中DNA平均浓度最高(10.6 ng/μL),平均ZOTU丰富度为11.8 ZOTUs。同样的消解方法与磁珠提取相结合,平均DNA浓度较低(6.19 ng/μL),但平均ZOTU丰富度最高(14.8 ZOTUs /样品)。增加蛋白酶K浓度和延长消化时间并没有显著提高DNA产量和物种丰富度。磷酸缓冲液联合PowerLyzer PowerSoil柱基提取试剂盒洗涤网的总DNA产率最低(0.16 ng/μL),样品丰富度最低(1 ZOTU)。虽然打珠法制备方法的总DNA产率较高,但它往往恢复最低的平均ZOTU丰富度,这表明存在来自细菌等非目标分类群的DNA。总的来说,用ATL缓冲液和蛋白酶K消化(不考虑消化时间),结合血液和amp;组织或MagMAX微生物组试剂盒,增加了从蜘蛛网中检测脊椎动物物种。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Evaluation of Extraction Methods for the Recovery of Vertebrate DNA From Spider Webs

Evaluation of Extraction Methods for the Recovery of Vertebrate DNA From Spider Webs

Spider webs have recently been recognized as an excellent source of vertebrate eDNA. Here we compare four sample preparation methods and three commercially available DNA extraction kits to optimize vertebrate eDNA recovery. We assessed DNA yield, purity, and fragment length before amplification, as well as vertebrate ZOTU richness and community composition after sequencing. Our results demonstrate that both sample preparation and extraction kit significantly influence DNA recovery from spider webs. Digestion of webs in ATL buffer with proteinase K for 72 h, followed by extraction with a column-based Blood & Tissue kit, yielded the highest mean DNA concentration (10.6 ng/μL) with a mean ZOTU richness of 11.8 ZOTUs per sample. The same digestion method paired with magnetic bead-based extraction produced lower mean DNA concentrations (6.19 ng/μL) but achieved the highest mean ZOTU richness (14.8 ZOTUs per sample). Increased proteinase K concentrations and longer digest times did not significantly improve DNA yield or species richness. Washing webs with phosphate buffer solution combined with PowerLyzer PowerSoil column-based extraction kit produced the lowest total DNA yield (0.16 ng/μL) and richness per sample (1 ZOTU). Although the bead-beating preparation method produced high total DNA yield, it often recovered the lowest mean ZOTU richness, indicating the presence of DNA from non-target taxa such as bacteria. Overall, digestion with ATL buffer and proteinase K (irrespective of digest time), combined with either the Blood & Tissue or MagMAX Microbiome kits, increased vertebrate species detections from spider webs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental DNA
Environmental DNA Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信