Comparison of six nucleic acid extraction methods for detection of viral DNA or RNA sequences in four different non-serum specimen types

Kok, Tuckweng; Wati, Satiya; Bayly, Belinda; Devonshire-Gill, David; Higgins, G.

doi:10.1016/s1386-6532(99)00066-9

Cited by 37 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most of these kits are based on guanidinium lysis and then the capture of nucleic acids on a column or bead of silica (commonly called Boom's method (1990)). Although most perform well, differences can be found depending on the virus and/or matrix analyzed (Rutjes et al 2005;Hourfar et al 2005;Knepp et al 2003;Kok et al 2000;Le Guyader et al 2009;Burgener et al 2003). In the last years, automated nucleic acid extraction platforms have been developed by commercial companies, which have been shown to be suitable for the analysis of virus in water samples (Rutjes et al 2005;Perelle et al 2009).…”

Section: Nucleic Acid Extraction and Purificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analytical Methods for Virus Detection in Water and Food

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Potential ways to address the issues that relate to the techniques for analyzing food and environmental samples for the presence of enteric viruses are discussed. It is not the authors' remit to produce or recommend standard or reference methods but to address specific issues in the analytical procedures. Foods of primary importance are bivalve molluscs, particularly, oysters, clams, and mussels; salad crops such as lettuce, green onions and other greens; and soft fruits such as raspberries and strawberries. All types of water, not only drinking water but also recreational water (fresh, marine, and swimming pool), river water (irrigation water), raw and treated sewage are potential vehicles for virus transmission. Well over 100 different enteric viruses could be food or water contaminants; however, with few exceptions, most well-characterized foodborne or waterborne viral outbreaks are restricted to hepatitis A virus (HAV) and calicivirus, essentially norovirus (NoV). Target viruses for analytical methods include, in addition to NoV and HAV, hepatitis E virus (HEV), enteroviruses (e.g., poliovirus), adenovirus, rotavirus, astrovirus, and any other relevant virus likely to be transmitted by food or water. A survey of the currently available methods for detection of viruses in food and environmental matrices was conducted, gathering information on protocols for extraction of viruses from various matrices and on the various specific detection techniques for each virus type.

show abstract

Section: Nucleic Acid Extraction and Purificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analytical Methods for Virus Detection in Water and Food

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Each sample type requires a specific protocol, and various types of methods for extraction of nucleic acids are available. [35][36][37] If extraction of nucleic acids of microorganisms is associated with a host (eg, plants or animal parts), selective lysis are required to ensure minimal contamination of nucleic acids from the host in the subsequent analysis. 38 For liquid samples, selective filtration is an opportunity, whereas for solid samples separation and isolation of cells is an alternative strategy.…”

Section: Sample Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metagenomic Detection Methods in Biopreparedness Outbreak Scenarios

Karlsson¹,

Hansen²,

Knutsson³

et al. 2013

Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, an

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Hence, viral nucleic acids must be extracted and detected as soon as possible when performing a pharmacokinetic study with PCR method in case of rapid degradation. However, the suitability or yield of nucleic acid from extraction procedures can vary depending on the nucleic acid and the biological material (Kok, T. et al, 2000). Great differences were found on the recoveries of viral DNA between tissues and blood as shown in Table 1, most experiments produced recovery of greater than 50%, while some were relative low but stable.…”

Section: Pharmacokinetic Characteristics Of Viral Vectorsmentioning

confidence: 99%