ArticlePloS one2019
Comparative analysis of eight DNA extraction methods for molecular research in mealybugs.
Article in PloS one, 2019. 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, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-Time PCR Detection ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparative metagenomic analysis of bacterial communities associated with two mealybug species, Phenacoccus saccharifolii and Dysmicoccus carens infesting sugarcane in Tamil Nadu, India.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2025Article
- A chromosome-level genome assembly of beet webworm, Loxostege sticticalis Linnaeus (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae).Scientific data · 2025Article
- Genomic DNA Extraction from Different Human Tissue Sample: Urine, Oral Gargle, Blood, and Cervical for Real Time Amplification by qPCR.Indian journal of clinical biochemistry : IJCB · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of commercial DNA isolation approaches for nanopore-only bacterial genome assembly and plasmid recovery.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- An experimental design for obtaining DNA of a target species and its diet from a single non-invasive genetic protocol.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- An evaluation of DNA extraction methods on historical and roadkill mammalian specimen.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Assessment of Psyllid Handling and DNA Extraction Methods in the Detection of 'Microorganisms · 2022Article
- Comparison and optimization of DNA Isolation protocols for high throughput genomic studies ofMethodsX · 2022Article
- Association of M55L and Q192R polymorphisms of paraoxonase 1 geneInternational journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For molecular research, the quality and integrity of DNA obtained will affect the reliability of subsequent results. Extracting quality DNA from scale insects, including mealybugs, can be difficult due to their small body size and waxy coating. In this study, we evaluate eight commonly used DNA extraction methods to determine their efficacy in PCR analysis across life stages and preservation times. We find that fresh samples, immediately upon collection or after 2 wks, resulted in the most effective DNA extraction. Methods using the DNeasy Blood & Tissue kit, NaCl, SDS-RNase A, and SDS isolated DNA of sufficient quality DNA. The SDS method gave high DNA yield, while the NaCl and SDS-RNase A methods gave lower yield. NaCl, SDS-RNase A, SDS, chloroform-isopentyl alcohol, and the salting-out methods all resulted in sufficient DNA for PCR, and performed equal to or better than that of the DNeasy Blood & Tissue kit. When time and cost per extraction were considered, the SDS method was most efficient, especially for later life stages of mealybug, regardless of preservation duration. DNA extracted from a single fresh sample of a female adult mealybug was adequate for more than 10,000 PCR reactions. For earlier stages, including the egg and 1st instar nymph samples, DNA was most effectively extracted by the Rapid method. Our results provide guidelines for the choice of effective DNA extraction method for mealybug or other small insects across different life stages and preservation status.
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.