ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2024
Enhancing the DNA yield intended for microbial sequencing from a low-biomass chlorinated drinking water.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Establishment of an Indigenous-Led Drinking Water Monitoring Program Leveraging qPCR and Metagenomics Testing in New Zealand.Water environment research : a research publication of the Water Environment Federation · 2026Article
- Bacterial community profiling of Malaysian drinking water reservoirs using metagenomic amplicon sequencing.BMC genomic data · 2026Article
- Influence of Copper Dose onACS ES&T water · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
DNA extraction yield from drinking water distribution systems and premise plumbing is a key metric for any downstream analysis such as 16S amplicon or metagenomics sequencing. This research aimed to optimize DNA yield from low-biomass (chlorinated) reverse osmosis-produced tap water by evaluating the impact of different factors during the DNA extraction procedure. The factors examined are (1) the impact of membrane materials and their pore sizes; (2) the impact of different cell densities; and (3) an alternative method for enhancing DNA yield via incubation (no nutrient spiking). DNA from a one-liter sampling volume of RO tap water with varying bacterial cell densities was extracted with five different filter membranes (mixed ester cellulose 0.2 μm, polycarbonate 0.2 μm, polyethersulfone 0.2 and 0.1 μm, polyvinylidene fluoride 0.1 μm) for biomass filtration. Our results show that (i) smaller membrane pore size solely did not increase the DNA yield of low-biomass RO tap water; (ii) the DNA yield was proportional to the cell density and substantially dependent on the filter membrane properties (i.e., the membrane materials and their pore sizes); (iii) by using our optimized DNA extraction protocol, we found that polycarbonate filter membrane with 0.2 μm pore size markedly outperformed in terms of quantity (DNA yield) and quality (background level of 16S gene copy number) of recovered microbial DNA; and finally, (iv) for one-liter sampling volume, incubation strategy enhanced the DNA yield and enabled accurate identification of the core members (i.e.,
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.