ArticleBMC research notes2015
Efficient extraction of small and large RNAs in bacteria for excellent total RNA sequencing and comprehensive transcriptome analysis.
Article in BMC research notes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing RNA quality in cryopreserved tissues without preservatives: impact of preservatives, thawing methods and tissue aliquot sizes.BMC biotechnology · 2025Article
- Development of an End-to-End Total RNA Sequencing Quality Control Framework for Blood-Based Biomarker Discovery.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2025Article
- Effective RNA isolation method for gram-positive and acid-fast bacteria: metamorphosed from conventional RNA isolation techniques.Archives of microbiology · 2024Article
- Optimising expression of the large dynamic range FRET pair mNeonGreen and superfolder mTurquoise2Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Genome-wide identification of Azospirillum brasilense Sp245 small RNAs responsive to nitrogen starvation and likely involvement in plant-microbe interactions.BMC genomics · 2020Article
- Article
- Recent Developments in Single-Cell RNA-Seq of Microorganisms.Biophysical journal · 2018Review
- Tools for Genomic and Transcriptomic Analysis of Microbes at Single-Cell Level.Frontiers in microbiology · 2017Review
- Toward reliable biomarker signatures in the age of liquid biopsies - how to standardize the small RNA-Seq workflow.Nucleic acids research · 2016Article
- Restoration of miR-20a expression suppresses cell proliferation, migration, and invasion in HepG2 cells.OncoTargets and therapy · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNext-generation transcriptome sequencing (RNA-Seq) has become the standard practice for studying gene splicing, mutations and changes in gene expression to obtain valuable, accurate biological conclusions. However, obtaining good sequencing coverage and depth to study these is impeded by the difficulties of obtaining high quality total RNA with minimal genomic DNA contamination. With this in mind, we evaluated the performance of Phenol-free total RNA purification kit (Amresco) in comparison with TRI Reagent (MRC) and RNeasy Mini (Qiagen) for the extraction of total RNA of Pseudomonas aeruginosa which was grown in glucose-supplemented (control) and polyethylene-supplemented (growth-limiting condition) minimal medium. All three extraction methods were coupled with an in-house DNase I treatment before the yield, integrity and size distribution of the purified RNA were assessed. RNA samples extracted with the best extraction kit were then sequenced using the Illumina HiSeq 2000 platform.
resultsTRI Reagent gave the lowest yield enriched with small RNAs (sRNAs), while RNeasy gave moderate yield of good quality RNA with trace amounts of sRNAs. The Phenol-free kit, on the other hand, gave the highest yield and the best quality RNA (RIN value of 9.85 ± 0.3) with good amounts of sRNAs. Subsequent bioinformatic analysis of the sequencing data revealed that 5435 coding genes, 452 sRNAs and 7 potential novel intergenic sRNAs were detected, indicating excellent sequencing coverage across RNA size ranges. In addition, detection of low abundance transcripts and consistency of their expression profiles across replicates from the same conditions demonstrated the reproducibility of the RNA extraction technique.
conclusionsAmresco's Phenol-free Total RNA purification kit coupled with DNase I treatment yielded the highest quality RNAs containing good ratios of high and low molecular weight transcripts with minimal genomic DNA. These RNA extracts gave excellent non-biased sequencing coverage useful for comprehensive total transcriptome sequencing and analysis. Furthermore, our findings would be useful for those interested in studying both coding and non-coding RNAs from precious bacterial samples cultivated in growth-limiting condition, in a single sequencing run.
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.