» Articles » PMID: 38316948

Improving the Efficiency of DNA Extraction from Iron Incrustations and Oilfield-produced Water

Overview
Journal Sci Rep
Specialty Science
Date 2024 Feb 5
PMID 38316948
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The quantity and quality of DNA isolated from environmental samples are crucial for getting robust high-throughput sequencing data commonly used for microbial community analysis. The differences in the nature and physicochemical properties of environmental samples impact DNA yields, and therefore, an optimisation of the protocols is always recommended. For instance, samples collected from corroded areas contain high concentrations of metals, salts, and hydrocarbons that can interfere with several steps of the DNA extraction protocols, thereby reducing yield and quality. In this study, we compared the efficiency of commercially available DNA extraction kits and laboratory-adopted methods for microbial community analysis of iron incrustations and oilfield-produced water samples. Modifications to the kits manufacturers' protocols were included to maximise the yield and quality. For iron incrustations, the modified protocol for FastDNA Spin Kit for Soil yielded higher DNA and resulted in higher diversity, including the recovery of low-abundant and rare taxa in the samples, compared to DNeasy PowerSoil Pro Kit. The DNA extracted with modified phenol-chloroform methods yielded higher DNA but failed to pass quality control PCR for 16S sequencing with and without purification. The protocols mentioned here can be used to maximise DNA recovery from iron incrustations and oilfield-produced water samples.

References
1.
Li A, Metch J, Wang Y, Garner E, Zhang A, Riquelme M . Effects of sample preservation and DNA extraction on enumeration of antibiotic resistance genes in wastewater. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2018; 94(2). DOI: 10.1093/femsec/fix189. View

2.
Kashinskaya E, Andree K, Simonov E, Solovyev M . DNA extraction protocols may influence biodiversity detected in the intestinal microbiome: a case study from wild Prussian carp, Carassius gibelio. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2016; 93(2). DOI: 10.1093/femsec/fiw240. View

3.
Endreny T, Burke D, Burchhardt K, Fabian M, Kretzer A . Bioretention column study of bacteria community response to salt-enriched artificial stormwater. J Environ Qual. 2012; 41(6):1951-9. DOI: 10.2134/jeq2012.0082. View

4.
Kennedy N, Walker A, Berry S, Duncan S, Farquarson F, Louis P . The impact of different DNA extraction kits and laboratories upon the assessment of human gut microbiota composition by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. PLoS One. 2014; 9(2):e88982. PMC: 3933346. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0088982. View

5.
Segata N, Izard J, Waldron L, Gevers D, Miropolsky L, Garrett W . Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biol. 2011; 12(6):R60. PMC: 3218848. DOI: 10.1186/gb-2011-12-6-r60. View