2016
DOI: 10.1186/s13104-016-2147-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

DNA analysis of molluscs from a museum wet collection: a comparison of different extraction methods

Abstract: BackgroundDNA isolation and PCR amplification from molluscan taxa is considered as problematic because polysaccharides in tissue and mucus presumably co-precipitate with the DNA and inhibit the activity of DNA polymerase. In the present study we tested two common extraction methods on specimens from the mollusc collection of the Natural History Museum Vienna (NHMW). We analysed a broad variety of taxa covering a large temporal span (acquisition years 1877 to 1999), which distinguishes our study from previous o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
20
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
2
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These results are in agreement with expectations for DNA obtained from historical material which is expected to be highly degraded, and PCR amplification generally restricted to short amplicons (<200 bp) [58,59]. Amplification of the standard COI barcoding region in molluscs has proven to be particularly problematic or impossible with historical material using standard primers [64]. …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…These results are in agreement with expectations for DNA obtained from historical material which is expected to be highly degraded, and PCR amplification generally restricted to short amplicons (<200 bp) [58,59]. Amplification of the standard COI barcoding region in molluscs has proven to be particularly problematic or impossible with historical material using standard primers [64]. …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…We therefore did not analyze several other sources of genetic material in natural history collections, namely formalin-fixed specimens and tissue samples treated with RNAlater. Previous work has attempted to extract high quality DNA from formalin-fixed specimens with varying results (Hykin, Bi & McGuire, 2015;Jaksch et al, 2016). Because the procedures used for these types of extractions are more involved and less often used, we chose not to include any formalin-fixed tissue subsamples in our study but recommend repeating our study with these specimens once extractions procedures are better developed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We therefore did not analyze several other sources of genetic material in natural history collections, namely formalin-fixed specimens and tissue samples treated with RNAlater. Previous work has attempted to extract high quality DNA from formalin-fixed specimens with varying results (Hykin et al 2015, Jaksch et al 2016. Because the procedures used for these types of extractions are more involved and less often used, we chose not to include any formalin-fixed tissue subsamples in our study but recommend repeating our study with these specimens once extractions procedures are better developed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is not currently common practice to standardize tissue mass prior to DNA extractions (Wilcox et al 2002, Aguirre-Peñafiel et al 2014, Naccarato et al 2015 or to report masses if they were standardized (Kayes et al 2013) except in experiments to compare various protocols or methods (Drabkova et al 2002, Guo et al 2009, Abdel-Latif and Osman 2017, Yalcinkaya et al 2017. In publications, researchers tend to qualitatively report the amount of starting material with phrases such "two small pieces" or "usually minute" (Hajibabaei et al 2005, Jaksch et al 2016.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%