Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30147271›Full record

ArticleVeterinary world2018

Modifications and optimization of manual methods for polymerase chain reaction and 16S rRNA gene sequencing quality community DNA extraction from goat rumen digesta.

Durgadevi Aphale, Aarohi Kulkarni

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary world, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Durgadevi AphalePraj Matrix, R & D Center, Division of Praj Industries Ltd., 402/403/1098, Urawade, Pirangut, Mulshi, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Aarohi KulkarniPraj Matrix, R & D Center, Division of Praj Industries Ltd., 402/403/1098, Urawade, Pirangut, Mulshi, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Praj (India) · INSymbiosis International University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimA critical prerequisite for studying rumen microbial community by high throughput molecular biology methods is good quality community DNA. Current methods of extraction use kits designed for samples from the different origin for rumen. This puts stress on the development of a relevant manual method for DNA extraction. The objective of this study was to modify the existing methods of community DNA extraction and thereby systematic comparison of their efficiency based on DNA yield, purity, 16S rRNA gene sequencing, and identification to determine the optimal DNA extraction methods whose DNA products reflect targeted bacterial communities special to rumen. MATERIALS AND

methodsEnzymatic method, Chemical method, Enzymatic + Chemical method, and Enzymatic + Chemical + Physical method were modified toward evaluation of community DNA extraction from solid, squeezed, and liquid fractions of goat rumen digesta. Each method was assessed critically for nucleic acid yield and its quality. The methods resulting in high nucleic acid yield, optimal purity ratios with intact band on agarose gel electrophoresis were optimized further. Optimized methods were studied using standard polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with universal bacterial primers and 16S rRNA primers of targeted rumen bacteria. Methods denoting the presence of targeted rumen bacteria were assessed further with 16S rRNA gene sequencing and identification studies. It led toward methods efficacy estimation for molecular biology applications. Effect of rumen sample preservation on community DNA extraction was also studied. Their mean standard deviation values were calculated to understand sampling criticality.

resultsModified Chemical method (Cetrimonium bromide) and Enzymatic+Chemical+Physical (ECP) method (Lysozyme-Cetrimonium bromide-Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate-freeze-thaw) could extract 835 ng/µl and 161 ng/µl community DNA from 1.5 g solid and 2 ml squeezed rumen digesta with purity ratios of 1.8 (A

conclusionTo date, this is the first report of modified methods wherein least chemicals and steps lead toward PCR and 16S rRNA gene sequencing quality community DNA extraction from goat rumen digesta. Detection of targeted rumen bacteria in solid and squeezed rumen digesta proves their strongest association with rumen fiber mat. It also marks the presence of distinct microbial communities in solid and squeezed rumen fractions that in turn differs the performance of each different method employed and yield of nucleic acid obtained. It also leaves a possibility of the presence of complex microbial consortia in squeezed rumen digesta whose DNA extraction methods need more attention. Finally, manual protocols of community DNA extraction may vary in different ruminant which suggests undertaking rigorous research in their establishment.

Indexed as

16S rRNA gene sequencingcommunity DNA extractiongoatpolymerase chain reactionrumen digesta

Identifiers

PMID30147271
PMCPMC6097561
OpenAlexW2883534083

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.