ArticleJournal of dental sciences2016
The impact of different DNA extraction methods on the analysis of microbial diversity of oral saliva from healthy youths by polymerase chain reaction-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Bacterial-Fungal Interactions on Childhood Caries Pathogenesis.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Correlation Study of the Microbiota Between Oral Cavity and Tonsils in Children With Tonsillar Hypertrophy.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Article
- Rapid oral bacteria detection based on real-time PCR for the forensic identification of saliva.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- The saliva microbiome profiles are minimally affected by collection method or DNA extraction protocols.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background/purposePolymerase chain reaction-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE), as a conventional molecular technique, was utilized to analyze the diversity of oral microbiota. However, studies found that the results of PCR-DGGE were affected by the DNA isolation method. This study compared QIAamp DNA Micro Kit extraction method with the phenol and chloroform extraction method for DNA isolation of saliva of healthy youths and analyzed PCR-DGGE fingerprints. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn the first stage, samples were divided into two after collection from eight health youths. Two methods were used to isolate the DNA for PCR-DGGE analysis. In the second stage, another 16 samples were collected from 14 youths. The better method, QIAamp DNA Micro Kit, was used to isolate the DNA for PCR-DGGE analysis. The cluster analysis was performed with unweighted pair-group method with arithmetic means.
resultsThe results in the first stage showed that the QIAamp DNA Micro Kit extraction method was more suitable for DNA extraction of saliva than the phenol-chloroform extraction method. In the second stage, the bands were changed into numbers "0", "1", and "2" to analyze the similarity of samples according to the bands' lightness. The similarity indices of different periods from the same individual showed that the microbiological composition was very similar (>0.95), while those from different individuals varied greatly (<0.90).
conclusionPCR-DGGE was more accurate in assessing oral microbial diversity by QIAamp DNA Micro Kit. Different individuals had large differences in oral microbial diversity but also had some common microbial dominant communities.
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.