Suppr超能文献

化学法与机械法提取 DNA 用于鉴定口腔革兰阳性菌和革兰阴性菌的效率比较。

Efficiency of chemical versus mechanical disruption methods of DNA extraction for the identification of oral Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.

机构信息

Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics, Guanghua School of Stomatology & Hospital of Stomatology, Guangdong Province Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.

Department of Preventive Dentistry, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Int Med Res. 2020 May;48(5):300060520925594. doi: 10.1177/0300060520925594.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Clinical diagnostics often requires the detection of multiple bacterial species in limited clinical samples with a single DNA extraction method. This study aimed to compare the bacterial DNA extraction efficiency of two lysis methods automated with the MagNA-Pure LC instrument. The samples included five oral bacterial species (three Gram-positive and two Gram-negative) with or without human saliva background.

METHODS

Genomic DNA (gDNA) was extracted from bacterial cultures by bead-beating lysis (BMP) or chemical lysis (MP), followed by automated purification and measurement by quantitative PCR.

RESULTS

For pure bacterial cultures, the MP method yielded higher quantities of extracted DNA and a lower detection limit than the BMP method, except where the samples contained high numbers of Gram-positive bacteria. For bacterial cultures with a saliva background, no difference in gDNA extraction efficacy was observed between the two methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficiency of a bacterial DNA extraction method is not only affected by the bacterial cell wall structure but also by the sample milieu. The MP method provided superior gDNA extraction efficiency when the samples contained a single bacterial species, whereas either of the BMP and MP methods could be applied with similar efficiencies to samples containing multiple species of bacteria.

摘要

目的

临床诊断通常需要在单一 DNA 提取方法下,从有限的临床样本中检测多种细菌种类。本研究旨在比较两种裂解方法的细菌 DNA 提取效率,这两种方法均通过 MagNA-Pure LC 仪器自动化处理。样本包括五种口腔细菌(三种革兰氏阳性菌和两种革兰氏阴性菌),有或没有人类唾液背景。

方法

通过珠磨裂解(BMP)或化学裂解(MP)从细菌培养物中提取基因组 DNA(gDNA),然后通过定量 PCR 进行自动纯化和测量。

结果

对于纯细菌培养物,MP 法比 BMP 法提取的 DNA 量更高,检测限更低,但当样本中含有大量革兰氏阳性菌时除外。对于有唾液背景的细菌培养物,两种方法的 gDNA 提取效果无差异。

结论

细菌 DNA 提取方法的效率不仅受细菌细胞壁结构的影响,还受样本环境的影响。当样本中仅含有单一细菌种类时,MP 法提供了更高的 gDNA 提取效率,而 BMP 和 MP 方法均可应用于含有多种细菌种类的样本,效率相当。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f580/7278108/83538248eca4/10.1177_0300060520925594-fig1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验