Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37379428›Full record

ArticleMicrobiologyOpen2023

An improved method for intracellular DNA (iDNA) recovery from terrestrial environments.

Diego Medina Caro, Lucas Horstmann, Lars Ganzert, Romulo Oses, Thomas Friedl, Dirk Wagner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MicrobiologyOpen, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

6 authors.

Diego Medina CaroGFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Section Geomicrobiology, Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0009-0007-8052-9738
Lucas HorstmannGFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Section Geomicrobiology, Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0009-0005-1750-3215
Lars GanzertGFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Section Geomicrobiology, Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9595-1041
Romulo OsesCentro Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Sustentable de Atacama (CRIDESAT), Universidad de Atacama, Copiapó, Chile.ORCID 0000-0003-2310-3339
Thomas FriedlDepartment Experimental Phycology and Culture Collection of Algae (EPSAG), Albrecht-von-Haller-Institute for Plant Sciences, Georg August University Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4070-776X
Dirk WagnerGFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Section Geomicrobiology, Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5064-497X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The simultaneous extraction of intracellular DNA (iDNA) and extracellular DNA (eDNA) can help to separate the living in situ community (represented by iDNA) from background DNA that originated both from past communities and from allochthonous sources. As iDNA and eDNA extraction protocols require separating cells from the sample matrix, their DNA yields are generally lower than direct methods that lyse the cells within the sample matrix. We, therefore, tested different buffers with and without adding a detergent mix (DM) in the extraction protocol to improve the recovery of iDNA from surface and subsurface samples that covered a variety of terrestrial environments. The combination of a highly concentrated sodium phosphate buffer plus DM significantly improved iDNA recovery for almost all tested samples. Additionally, the combination of sodium phosphate and EDTA improved iDNA recovery in most of the samples and even allowed the successful extraction of iDNA from extremely low-biomass iron-bearing rock samples taken from the deep biosphere. Based on our results, we recommend using a protocol with sodium phosphate in combination with either a DM (NaP 300 mM + DM) or EDTA (NaP + EDTA 300 mM). Furthermore, for studies that rely on the eDNA pool, we recommend using buffers solely based on sodium phosphate because the addition of EDTA or a DM resulted in a decrease in eDNA for most of the tested samples. These improvements can help reduce community bias in environmental studies and contribute to better characterizations of both modern and past ecosystems.

Indexed as

DNAEcosystemEdetic AcidPhosphatesDNAEdetic AcidPhosphatessodium phosphatecell detachmentdeep biosphereDNA desorptionDNA extractionintracellular DNAlow biomass

Identifiers

PMID37379428
PMCPMC10291228

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.