Comparison of DNA extraction methods for analysis of turkey cecal microbiota

被引:40
作者
Scupham, A. J. [1 ]
Jones, J. A. [1 ]
Wesley, I. V. [1 ]
机构
[1] USDA ARS, Pre Harvest Food Safety & Enter Dis Res Unit, Natl Anim Dis Ctr, Ames, IA 50010 USA
关键词
bacterial; diversity; ecology; faeces; fungal; purification;
D O I
10.1111/j.1365-2672.2006.03094.x
中图分类号
Q81 [生物工程学(生物技术)]; Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 0836 ; 090102 ; 100705 ;
摘要
As a prelude to long-term studies to characterize the microbiota of the turkey ceca, 14 DNA isolation protocols were evaluated for their ability to reproducibly characterize microbial diversity. Eight commercially available DNA extraction kits were assessed. DNA quantity and quality were assessed and competitive PCR was used to quantify the 16S bacterial rRNA genes. The Invitrogen Easy-DNA Kit extraction method for large samples yielded over eight times more DNA than any other method (3144 +/- 873 mu g g(-1) of sample, P < 0.05). Bacterial and fungal species richness was estimated by Automated Ribosomal Intergenic Spacer Analysis. The Invitrogen Easy-DNA Kit generated the greatest bacterial species richness (46 +/- 7 peaks) while Bio-Rad Aquapure yielded the highest fungal species richness (71 +/- 9.5 peaks). Cluster analysis indicated different DNA extraction methods generated different microbial community compositions using the same cecal matrix from a single donor bird. Optimized DNA extraction protocols Invitrogen Easy-DNA Kit extraction method for large samples and Bio-Rad Aquapure outperform other methods for extraction of DNA from poultry fecal samples, although these methods do not necessarily recover all available DNA. They will be used in future studies to monitor the dynamics of microbial communities of the avian ceca.
引用
收藏
页码:401 / 409
页数:9
相关论文
共 41 条
  • [11] Gong JH, 2002, FEMS MICROBIOL LETT, V208, P1, DOI 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2002.tb11051.x
  • [12] Poultry digestive microflora biodiversity as indicated by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis
    Hume, ME
    Kubena, LF
    Edrington, TS
    Donskey, CJ
    Moore, RW
    Ricke, SC
    Nisbet, DJ
    [J]. POULTRY SCIENCE, 2003, 82 (07) : 1100 - 1107
  • [13] JANSSON JK, 1996, MOL MICROBIAL ECOL M, P445
  • [14] COMPARISON OF MEDIA FOR ISOLATION OF POULTRY INTESTINAL BACTERIA
    KELLEY, RW
    [J]. APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1983, 46 (02) : 421 - 424
  • [15] MEGA2: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis software
    Kumar, S
    Tamura, K
    Jakobsen, IB
    Nei, M
    [J]. BIOINFORMATICS, 2001, 17 (12) : 1244 - 1245
  • [16] Lane D., 1991, 16S/23S rRNA sequencing: Nucleic acid techniques in bacterial systematics, P115, DOI DOI 10.4135/9781446279281.N7
  • [17] Estimation of the abundance of an uncultured soil bacterial strain by a competitive quantitative PCR method
    Lee, SY
    Bollinger, J
    Bezdicek, D
    Ogram, A
    [J]. APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1996, 62 (10) : 3787 - 3793
  • [18] Evaluation of QIAamp® DNA Stool Mini Kit for ecological studies of gut microbiota
    Li, M
    Gong, J
    Cottrill, M
    Yu, H
    de Lange, C
    Burton, J
    Topp, E
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGICAL METHODS, 2003, 54 (01) : 13 - 20
  • [19] Characterization of microbial diversity by determining terminal restriction fragment length polymorphisms of genes encoding 16S rRNA
    Liu, WT
    Marsh, TL
    Cheng, H
    Forney, LJ
    [J]. APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1997, 63 (11) : 4516 - 4522
  • [20] Bacterial diversity in the human gut
    Macfarlane, S
    Macfarlane, GT
    [J]. ADVANCES IN APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY, VOL 54, 2004, 54 : 261 - 289