2016
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0163148
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of Lysis Methods for the Extraction of Bacterial DNA for Analysis of the Vaginal Microbiota

Abstract: BackgroundRecent studies on the vaginal microbiota have employed molecular techniques such as 16S rRNA gene sequencing to describe the bacterial community as a whole. These techniques require the lysis of bacterial cells to release DNA before purification and PCR amplification of the 16S rRNA gene. Currently, methods for the lysis of bacterial cells are not standardised and there is potential for introducing bias into the results if some bacterial species are lysed less efficiently than others. This study aime… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
64
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
1
64
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Hence, biological variability of the vaginal microbiota exceeds the extent of technical variation rising from the sampling collection technique (this study) and DNA extraction method [21]. Therefore past and future vaginal microbiota studies employing different sampling strategies should be comparable in the absence of other technical confounders, such as sample storage, sequencing strategy or bioinformatic parameters.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hence, biological variability of the vaginal microbiota exceeds the extent of technical variation rising from the sampling collection technique (this study) and DNA extraction method [21]. Therefore past and future vaginal microbiota studies employing different sampling strategies should be comparable in the absence of other technical confounders, such as sample storage, sequencing strategy or bioinformatic parameters.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is currently not known how rectovaginal and vaginal selective cultures, PCR, and sequencing results relate to one another, but it is possible that pathobionts are not only under-detected in sequencing studies due to the bioinformatics used, but also due to DNA extraction, amplification, and other biases. For example, the detection rate in the HARP study was especially low, which may have been due to the fact that we did not use bead-beating during DNA extraction in that study (Gill et al, 2016). Third, some of the standard diagnostic tests that we used are known to have lower sensitivity than NAAT-based tests (e.g., culture for vulvovaginal candidiasis and T. vaginalis), and not all women in all three studies were screened for all STI pathogens.…”
Section: Pathobionts In the Vaginal Microbiotamentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Sample collection, DNA extraction, and PCR primers impact sensitivity to different taxa (17,18), sometimes so strongly that particular taxa can go undetected (e.g., Gardnerella; ref. 19).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%