2008
DOI: 10.1128/aem.01047-08
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simple and Safe Method for Simultaneous Isolation of Microbial RNA and DNA from Problematic Populations

Abstract: We describe a novel, rapid, and safe method for extracting RNA and DNA from refractory microbes, which avoids the use of phenol or chloroform. It has been used successfully to isolate high-quality nucleic acids from pure cultures and environmental populations known to resist widely used extraction protocols.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
1
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…From AMV sediment incubations, RNA was extracted according to McIlroy et al (2008), whereas from GB sediments DNA was extracted according to Zhou et al (1996), because RNA extraction did not result in the required amounts of high-quality rRNA.…”
Section: Card-fishmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From AMV sediment incubations, RNA was extracted according to McIlroy et al (2008), whereas from GB sediments DNA was extracted according to Zhou et al (1996), because RNA extraction did not result in the required amounts of high-quality rRNA.…”
Section: Card-fishmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three different DNA extraction methods were used in attempts to minimize any potential biases associated with each, and the extracts were combined. These three methods included those of McVeigh et al (38) and McIlroy et al (36) and a FASTDNA spin kit (Qbiogene, Melbourne, Australia). The former two were selected because they had performed best in comparative trials at recovering DNA from marker activated sludge populations known to resist many DNA extraction protocols (S. McIlroy, K. Porter, S. Schroeder, R. J. Seviour, and D. Tillett, unpublished data).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The analysis of 16S rRNA genes through clone libraries and fingerprinting approaches such as denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) has greatly extended our knowledge about the phylogenetic richness of sponge-associated bacteria and archaea (Webster et al, 2001(Webster et al, , 2004Hentschel et al, 2002;Taylor et al, 2004Taylor et al, , 2007bHolmes and Blanch, 2006;Longford et al, 2007;Schmitt et al, 2007Schmitt et al, , 2008Thiel et al, 2007;Mohamed et al, 2008b;Zhu et al, 2008). Researchers in other systems have taken this approach one step further, yielding insights into both richness and activity by comparing 16S rRNA gene-and 16S rRNA-derived sequences, respectively (Moeseneder et al, , 2005Winter et al, 2001;Troussellier et al, 2002;Mills et al, 2005;Gentile et al, 2006;Martinez et al, 2006;Brinkmann et al, 2008;McIlroy et al, 2008;West et al, 2008;Rodriguez-Blanco et al, 2009). In general, cellular concentrations of rRNA are correlated with growth rate and activity (DeLong et al, 1989;Poulsen et al, 1993), hence-with acknowledgement of certain caveats (e.g., for ammoniaoxidizing bacteria; Morgenroth et al, 2000)-the rRNA itself can yield useful information about which community members are active.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%