Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35478279›Full record

ArticleMicrobiologyOpen2022

Bovine milk microbiota: Evaluation of different DNA extraction protocols for challenging samples.

Julia A Schwenker, Meike Friedrichsen, Silvio Waschina, Corinna Bang, Andre Franke, Ricarda Mayer, Christina S Hölzel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MicrobiologyOpen, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Occurrence and diagnostic of intermittent shedding ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors.

Julia A SchwenkerDepartment for Animal Hygiene and Health, Institute of Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6591-1671
Meike FriedrichsenDepartment for Animal Hygiene and Health, Institute of Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
Silvio WaschinaInstitute of Human Nutrition and Food Science, Nutriinformatics, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
Corinna BangInstitute of Clinical Molecular Biology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
Andre FrankeInstitute of Clinical Molecular Biology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
Ricarda MayerDepartment of Veterinary Sciences, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Oberschleißheim, Germany.
Christina S HölzelDepartment for Animal Hygiene and Health, Institute of Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8540-5928

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of an adequate protocol that accurately extracts microbial DNA from bovine milk samples is of importance for downstream analysis such as 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing. Although sequencing platforms such as Illumina are very common, there are reservations concerning reproducibility in challenging samples that combine low bacterial loads with high amounts of host DNA. The objective of this study was to evaluate six different DNA extraction protocols applied to four different prototype milk samples (low/high level of colony-forming units [cfu] and somatic cells). DNA extracts were sequenced on Illumina MiSeq with primers for the hypervariable regions V1V2 and V3V4. Different protocols were evaluated by analyzing the yield and purity of DNA extracts and the number of clean reads after sequencing. Three protocols with the highest median number of clean reads were selected. To assess reproducibility, these extraction replicates were resequenced in triplicates (n = 120). The most reproducible results for α- and β-diversity were obtained with the modified DNeasy Blood & Tissue kit after a chemical pretreatment plus resuspension of the cream fraction. The unmodified QIAamp DNA Mini kit performed particularly weak in the sample representing unspecific mastitis. These results suggest that pretreatment in combination with the modified DNeasy Blood & Tissue kit is useful in extracting microbial DNA from challenging milk samples. To increase reproducibility, we recommend that duplicates, if not triplicates, should be sequenced. We showed that high counts of somatic cells challenged DNA extraction, which shapes the need to apply modified extraction protocols.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaMilkAnimalsDNADNA, BacterialFemaleReproducibility of ResultsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SDNADNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16Sbovine milkDNA extractionIllumina amplicon sequencingmilk microbiome

Identifiers

PMID35478279
PMCPMC9059235

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.