Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26291624›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

DNA Extraction Method Affects the Detection of a Fungal Pathogen in Formalin-Fixed Specimens Using qPCR.

Andrea J Adams, John P LaBonte, Morgan L Ball, Kathryn L Richards-Hrdlicka, Mary H Toothman, Cheryl J Briggs

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Andrea J AdamsDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.
John P LaBonteDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.
Morgan L BallWildlands Conservation Science, Lompoc, California, United States of America.
Kathryn L Richards-HrdlickaSchool of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States of America.
Mary H ToothmanDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.
Cheryl J BriggsDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.
University of California, Santa Barbara · USWildlands Network · USYale University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Museum collections provide indispensable repositories for obtaining information about the historical presence of disease in wildlife populations. The pathogenic amphibian chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd) has played a significant role in global amphibian declines, and examining preserved specimens for Bd can improve our understanding of its emergence and spread. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) enables Bd detection with minimal disturbance to amphibian skin and is significantly more sensitive to detecting Bd than histology; therefore, developing effective qPCR methodologies for detecting Bd DNA in formalin-fixed specimens can provide an efficient and effective approach to examining historical Bd emergence and prevalence. Techniques for detecting Bd in museum specimens have not been evaluated for their effectiveness in control specimens that mimic the conditions of animals most likely to be encountered in museums, including those with low pathogen loads. We used American bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) of known infection status to evaluate the success of qPCR to detect Bd in formalin-fixed specimens after three years of ethanol storage. Our objectives were to compare the most commonly used DNA extraction method for Bd (PrepMan, PM) to Macherey-Nagel DNA FFPE (MN), test optimizations for Bd detection with PM, and provide recommendations for maximizing Bd detection. We found that successful detection is relatively high (80-90%) when Bd loads before formalin fixation are high, regardless of the extraction method used; however, at lower infection levels, detection probabilities were significantly reduced. The MN DNA extraction method increased Bd detection by as much as 50% at moderate infection levels. Our results indicate that, for animals characterized by lower pathogen loads (i.e., those most commonly encountered in museum collections), current methods may underestimate the proportion of Bd-infected amphibians. Those extracting DNA from archived museum specimens should ensure that the techniques they are using are known to provide high-quality throughput DNA for later analysis.

Indexed as

AmphibiansAnimalsAnimals, WildChytridiomycotaDNA, FungalFormaldehydeMuseumsRana catesbeianaReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSpecimen HandlingDNA, FungalFormaldehyde

Identifiers

PMID26291624
PMCPMC4546330
OpenAlexW1889917066

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.