ArticlePloS one2011
Comparison of eight methods for the extraction of Bacillus atrophaeus spore DNA from eleven common interferents and a common swab.
Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of nine extraction methods for bacterial identification using the ONT MinION sequencer.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
- Mechanisms of Sporicidal Activity Induced by Ionized Hydrogen Peroxide in the Spores ofApplied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association · 2021Article
- Spatial Variability of Microbial Communities and Salt Distributions Across a Latitudinal Aridity Gradient in the Atacama Desert.Microbial ecology · 2021Article
- Demonstrating the presence of Ehrlichia canis DNA from different tissues of dogs with suspected subclinical ehrlichiosis.Parasites & vectors · 2020Article
- Vancomycin-Loaded Nanoparticles Enhance Sporicidal and Antibacterial Efficacy forFrontiers in microbiology · 2019Article
- Cross-institute evaluations of inhibitor-resistant PCR reagents for direct testing of aerosol and blood samples containing biological warfare agent DNA.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2014Article
- High-throughput real-time PCR-based genotyping without DNA purification.BMC research notes · 2012Article
- Raman spectroscopic detection of anthrax endospores in powder samples.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2012Article
- Rapid filtration separation-based sample preparation method for Bacillus spores in powdery and environmental matrices.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2012Article
- The potential of TaqMan Array Cards for detection of multiple biological agents by real-time PCR.PloS one · 2012Article
- A sample extraction method for faster, more sensitive PCR-based detection of pathogens in blood culture.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMDArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Eight DNA extraction products or methods (Applied Biosystems PrepFiler Forensic DNA Extraction Kit; Bio-Rad Instagene Only, Bio-Rad Instagene & Spin Column Purification; EpiCentre MasterPure DNA & RNA Kit; FujiFilm QuickGene Mini80; Idaho Technologies 1-2-3 Q-Flow Kit; MoBio UltraClean Microbial DNA Isolation Kit; Sigma Extract-N-Amp Plant and Seed Kit) were adapted to facilitate extraction of DNA under BSL3 containment conditions. DNA was extracted from 12 common interferents or sample types, spiked with spores of Bacillus atropheaus. Resulting extracts were tested by real-time PCR. No one method was the best, in terms of DNA extraction, across all sample types. Statistical analysis indicated that the PrepFiler method was the best method from six dry powders (baking, biological washing, milk, plain flour, filler and talcum) and one solid (Underarm deodorant), the UltraClean method was the best from four liquids (aftershave, cola, nutrient broth, vinegar), and the MasterPure method was the best from the swab sample type. The best overall method, in terms of DNA extraction, across all sample types evaluated was the UltraClean method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.