Calderón-Franco David, Lin Qingnan, van Loosdrecht Mark C M, Abbas Ben, Weissbrodt David G
Department of Biotechnology, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020 Mar 13;8:171. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00171. eCollection 2020.
The dissemination of DNA and xenogenic elements across waterways is under scientific and public spotlight due to new gene-editing tools, such as do-it-yourself (DIY) CRISPR-Cas kits deployable at kitchen table. Over decades, prevention of spread of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), antimicrobial resistances (AMR), and pathogens from transgenic systems has focused on microbial inactivation. However, sterilization methods have not been assessed for DNA release and integrity. Here, we investigated the fate of intracellular DNA from cultures of model prokaryotic () and eukaryotic () cells that are traditionally used as microbial chassis for genetic modifications. DNA release was tracked during exposure of these cultures to conventional sterilization methods. Autoclaving, disinfection with glutaraldehyde, and microwaving are used to inactivate broths, healthcare equipment, and GMOs produced at kitchen table. DNA fragmentation and PCR-ability were measured on top of cell viability and morphology. Impact of these methods on DNA integrity was verified on a template of free λ DNA. Intense regular autoclaving (121°C, 20 min) resulted in the most severe DNA degradation and lowest household gene amplification capacity: 1.28 ± 0.11, 2.08 ± 0.03, and 4.96 ± 0.28 logs differences to the non-treated controls were measured from , , and λ DNA, respectively. Microwaving exerted strong DNA fragmentation after 100 s of exposure when free λ DNA was in solution (3.23 ± 0.06 logs difference) but a minor effect was observed when DNA was released from and (0.24 ± 0.14 and 1.32 ± 0.02 logs differences with the control, respectively). Glutaraldehyde prevented DNA leakage by preserving cell structures, while DNA integrity was not altered. The results show that current sterilization methods are effective on microorganism inactivation but do not safeguard an aqueous residue exempt of biologically reusable xenogenic material, being regular autoclaving the most severe DNA-affecting method. Reappraisal of sterilization methods is required along with risk assessment on the emission of DNA fragments in urban systems and nature.
由于新的基因编辑工具,如可在餐桌上使用的自制CRISPR-Cas试剂盒,DNA和异种元素在水道中的传播受到了科学界和公众的关注。几十年来,防止转基因生物(GMO)、抗微生物耐药性(AMR)和转基因系统中的病原体传播一直侧重于微生物灭活。然而,尚未评估灭菌方法对DNA释放和完整性的影响。在这里,我们研究了传统上用作基因改造微生物底盘的原核()和真核()细胞培养物中细胞内DNA的去向。在将这些培养物暴露于传统灭菌方法的过程中跟踪DNA释放情况。高压灭菌、用戊二醛消毒和微波处理用于灭活肉汤、医疗设备和在餐桌上生产的转基因生物。在检测细胞活力和形态的基础上,测量DNA片段化和PCR扩增能力。在游离λDNA模板上验证了这些方法对DNA完整性的影响。强烈的常规高压灭菌(121°C,20分钟)导致最严重的DNA降解和最低的家用基因扩增能力:分别从、和λDNA测量到与未处理对照相比有1.28±0.11、2.08±0.03和4.96±0.28个对数差异。当游离λDNA处于溶液中时,微波照射100秒后会产生强烈的DNA片段化(差异为3.23±0.06个对数),但当DNA从和中释放时,观察到的影响较小(与对照相比分别为0.24±0.14和1.32±0.02个对数差异)。戊二醛通过保留细胞结构防止DNA泄漏,同时DNA完整性未改变。结果表明,目前的灭菌方法对微生物灭活有效,但不能保证不含生物可重复利用的异种材料的水性残留物,常规高压灭菌是对DNA影响最严重的方法。需要重新评估灭菌方法,并对城市系统和自然环境中DNA片段的排放进行风险评估。