ArticleMethods and protocols2021
Comparison and Validation of Ichthyoplankton DNA Extraction Methods.
Article in Methods and protocols, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Ichthyoplankton is the cluster of planktonic organisms that consists of fish eggs and larvae. These planktonic stages belong to the temporary zooplankton, representing future exploitable stocks. The study of the early ontogenesis of fish plays a key role in the understanding and evaluation of these populations through the study of their abundance and their spatio-temporal distribution. To better understand and protect these fisheries resources, it is essential to identify the different stages of fish embryonic development. This identification is usually performed using the classical method, based on morphological criteria under a binocular magnifying glass; however, this methodology is not always sufficient and is time consuming and, therefore, it is necessary to rely increasingly on molecular tools. The major problem with these tools is the yield and quality of the nucleic acids extracted from ichthyoplankton, especially in the case of eggs, which are small. Several methods have been used for DNA extraction from ichthyoplankton, either automated or manual, but very often from larvae or adults. In the present work, five fish egg DNA extraction protocols were compared based on their DNA yield and extraction quality, verified by agarose gel electrophoresis and quantitative PCR amplification. The results showed that extraction by our heat-protocol for direct PCR (Hp-dPCR) presents the simplest and cheapest protocol of all the kits used in this study, providing a sufficient quantity and quality of nucleic acids to be used for PCR amplification, and being within the reach of third world laboratories that often do not have sufficiently large budgets to obtain automated kits.
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.