ArticleIranian journal of microbiology2022
Combination and improvement of conventional DNA extraction methods in Actinobacteria to obtain high-quantity and high-quality DNA.
Article in Iranian journal of microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of long-read 16S rRNA next-generation sequencing for identification of bacterial isolates in a clinical diagnostic laboratory.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Enhancing Clinical Utility: Utilization of International Standards and Guidelines for Metagenomic Sequencing in Infectious Disease Diagnosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: DNA extraction is an important step of any molecular experiment. DNA could not be easily extracted from members of actinomycetes by the usual methods of lysis. Due to the low efficiency of the conventional DNA extraction methods, development of an effective technique for DNA extraction of actinobacteria in emergency cases seems to be necessary. Since most of the DNA extraction techniques and commercial kits are not efficient enough to extract DNA from actinobacteria, this study was conducted to improve an efficient method obtained from conventional one to extract DNA from this group of bacteria. Materials and Methods: DNA extraction was performed using five methods (an improved method, Invisorb Spin Plant Mini Kit, EZ-10 Spin Column, Sarrbrucken method (HZI, Germany) and Kirby Bauer's method). To evaluate the quantity and quality of extracted genomic DNA, UV absorbance of all samples and efficiency of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were evaluated. Results: Overall, the results revealed that the highest quantity (up to 4000 ng/μl) and good quality of DNA was obtained using introduced DNA extraction method. Conclusion: Results indicated that recently introduced improved method was more efficient for extraction of DNA from actinobacteria for DDH (DNA-DNA hybridization) test and for those require the high concentration of DNA.
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.