期刊文献+

两种从土壤中提取DNA方法的比较 被引量:4

Comparison of Two DNA-Extraction from Soil
下载PDF
导出
摘要 为土壤微生物多样性研究选取理想的DNA提取方法,该文比较了直接法和间接法从土壤中提取微生物总DNA的效果。结果表明:直接法提取量大,每克土壤提取到DNA约10.26μg,而间接法仅提取到0.55μg,直接法DNA提取量约为间接法的19倍。直接法得到的DNA包含细菌种群较间接法丰富,DGGE分析结果显示,二者的条带数分别为35条和28条,占检测条带总数的92.1%和78.9%。间接法提取到DNA纯度较直接法高,不需纯化即可用于PCR扩增和BamHⅠ酶切反应。 To provide an ideal DNA-extraction aproach for mlecular lechnique in microbial diversity research,the effect of direct and indirect method was compared in this paper.Results revealed that direct extraction often had higher efficiency,about 10.26μg DNA could be extracted form one gram soil on average,which was approximal 19 times as much as that extracted by indirect method.In addition,Directed DNA concloded more diverse bacterial species.DGGE pattem showed that of all the 38 detected bands,direct and indirect method detected 35 and 28 bands respectively,accounting for 92.1% and 78.9% of the total.However,DNA extracted by direct approach was so impure that PCR reaction and Bam H I digestion can't conduct except purification.This paper offered an optional DNA extraction for scholars in soil microbial research.
出处 《生物技术》 CAS CSCD 2006年第5期34-36,共3页 Biotechnology
基金 河南工业大学博士基金项目资助(150206)
关键词 土壤微生物 DNA提取 酶切 PCR-DGGE soil microorganism DNA extraction purification digest PCR-DGGE
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

二级参考文献129

  • 1Hiroyuki sekiguchi,Masataka Watanabe,Tadaatsu Nakahara,et al.Succession of bacterial community structure along the Changjiang river determined by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis and clone library analysis[J].Applied and environmental microbiology,2002,68(10):5142-5150.
  • 2Richard J Ellis,Philip Morgan,Andrew J.Weightman and John C.Fry,Cultivation-dependent and independent approaches for determining bacterial diversity in heavy-metal-contaminated soil[J].Applied and environmental microbiology,2003,(69)6:3223-3230.
  • 3[1]Elsas J D van,Smalla K. Extraction of microbial community DNA from soils. In: Akkermans A D L, van Elsas J D, de Bruijn F J. eds. Molecular Microbial Ecology Manual. Kluwer Academic Publishers,1995
  • 4[2]Elsas J D van,Duarte G F,Rosado A S,et al. Microbiological and molecular biological methods for monitoring microbial inoculants and their effects in the soil environment. Jour. Microbial. Methods,1998,32:133~154
  • 5[3]Horton T R,Bruns T D.The molecular revolution in ectomycorrhizal ecology: Peeking into the black-box. Molecular Ecology,2001,10:1 855~1 871
  • 6[4]Ogram A. Discussion soil molecular microbial ecology at age 20: Methodological challenges for the future. Soil Biology & Biochemistry,2000,32:1 499~1 504
  • 7[5]Bridge Paul,Brian Spooner. Soil fungi: Diversity and detection. Plant and Soil,2001,232:147~154
  • 8[6]Dunbar J,Ticknor L O,Kuske C Rl. Assessment of microbial diversity in four southwestern United States soils by 16S rRNA gene terminal restriction fragment analysis. Appl. Environ. Microbial.,2000,66:2 943~2 950
  • 9[7]Tiedje J M,Asuming-Brempong S,Nüsslein K,et al. Opening the black box of soil microbial diversity. Applied Soil Ecology,1999,13:1 109~1 122
  • 10[8]Ward D M,Weller R,Bateson M M. 16S rRNA sequences reveal numerous unculturated microorganisms in a natural community. Nature,1990,345: 63~65

共引文献499

同被引文献41

引证文献4

二级引证文献18

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部