12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Pitfalls of DNA Quantification Using DNA-Binding Fluorescent Dyes and Suggested Solutions

      research-article
      , , , *
      PLoS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The Qubit fluorometer is a DNA quantification device based on the fluorescence intensity of fluorescent dye binding to double-stranded DNA (dsDNA). Qubit is generally considered useful for checking DNA quality before next-generation sequencing because it measures intact dsDNA. To examine the most accurate and suitable methods for quantifying DNA for quality assessment, we compared three quantification methods: NanoDrop, which measures UV absorbance; Qubit; and quantitative PCR (qPCR), which measures the abundance of a target gene. For the comparison, we used three types of DNA: 1) DNA extracted from fresh frozen liver tissues (Frozen-DNA); 2) DNA extracted from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded liver tissues comparable to those used for Frozen-DNA (FFPE-DNA); and 3) DNA extracted from the remaining fractions after RNA extraction with Trizol reagent (Trizol-DNA). These DNAs were serially diluted with distilled water and measured using three quantification methods. For Frozen-DNA, the Qubit values were not proportional to the dilution ratio, in contrast with the NanoDrop and qPCR values. This non-proportional decrease in Qubit values was dependent on a lower salt concentration, and over 1 mM NaCl in the DNA solution was required for the Qubit measurement. For FFPE-DNA, the Qubit values were proportional to the dilution ratio and were lower than the NanoDrop values. However, electrophoresis revealed that qPCR reflected the degree of DNA fragmentation more accurately than Qubit. Thus, qPCR is superior to Qubit for checking the quality of FFPE-DNA. For Trizol-DNA, the Qubit values were proportional to the dilution ratio and were consistently lower than the NanoDrop values, similar to FFPE-DNA. However, the qPCR values were higher than the NanoDrop values. Electrophoresis with SYBR Green I and single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) quantification demonstrated that Trizol-DNA consisted mostly of non-fragmented ssDNA. Therefore, Qubit is not always the most accurate method for quantifying DNA available for PCR.

          Related collections

          Most cited references7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Effective DNA/RNA Co-Extraction for Analysis of MicroRNAs, mRNAs, and Genomic DNA from Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Specimens

          Background Retrospective studies of archived human specimens, with known clinical follow-up, are used to identify predictive and prognostic molecular markers of disease. Due to biochemical differences, however, formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) DNA and RNA have generally been extracted separately from either different tissue sections or from the same section by dividing the digested tissue. The former limits accurate correlation whilst the latter is impractical when utilizing rare or limited archived specimens. Principal Findings For effective recovery of genomic DNA and total RNA from a single FFPE specimen, without splitting the proteinase-K digested tissue solution, we optimized a co-extraction method by using TRIzol and purifying DNA from the lower aqueous and RNA from the upper organic phases. Using a series of seven different archived specimens, we evaluated the total amounts of genomic DNA and total RNA recovered by our TRIzol-based co-extraction method and compared our results with those from two commercial kits, the Qiagen AllPrep DNA/RNA FFPE kit, for co-extraction, and the Ambion RecoverAll™ Total Nucleic Acid Isolation kit, for separate extraction of FFPE-DNA and -RNA. Then, to accurately assess the quality of DNA and RNA co-extracted from a single FFPE specimen, we used qRT-PCR, gene expression profiling and methylation assays to analyze microRNAs, mRNAs, and genomic DNA recovered from matched fresh and FFPE MCF10A cells. These experiments show that the TRIzol-based co-extraction method provides larger amounts of FFPE-DNA and –RNA than the two other methods, and particularly provides higher quality microRNAs and genomic DNA for subsequent molecular analyses. Significance We determined that co-extraction of genomic DNA and total RNA from a single FFPE specimen is an effective recovery approach to obtain high-quality material for parallel molecular and high-throughput analyses. Our optimized approach provides the option of collecting DNA, which would otherwise be discarded or degraded, for additional or subsequent studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Factors affecting quantification of total DNA by UV spectroscopy and PicoGreen fluorescence.

            The total amount of DNA in a preparation extracted from tissues can be measured in several ways, each method offering advantages and disadvantages. For the sake of accuracy in quantitation, it is of interest to compare these methodologies and determine if good correlation can be achieved between them. Different answers can also be clues to the physical state of the DNA. In this study, we investigated the lack of correlation between ultraviolet (UV) absorbance and fluorescent (PicoGreen) measurements of the concentration of DNAs isolated from plant tissues. We found that quantitation based on the absorbance-based method correlated with quantitation based on phosphorus content, while the PicoGreen-based method did not. We also found evidence of the production of single-stranded DNA under conditions where the DNA was not fragmented into small pieces. The PicoGreen fluorescent signal was dependent on DNA fragment size but only if the DNA was in pure water, while DNA in buffer was much less sensitive. Finally, we document the high sensitivity of the PicoGreen assays to the detergent known as CTAB (cetyldimethylethylammonium bromide). The CTAB-based method is highly popular for low-cost DNA extraction with many published variations for plant and other tissues. The removal of residual CTAB is important for accurate quantitation of DNA using PicoGreen.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis by single molecule counting technologies.

              Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis of fetal chromosomal aneuploidies and monogenic diseases by analysing fetal DNA present in maternal plasma poses a challenging goal. In particular, the presence of background maternal DNA interferes with the analysis of fetal DNA. Using single molecule counting methods, including digital PCR and massively parallel sequencing, many of the former problems have been solved. Digital mutation dosage assessment can detect the number of mutant alleles a fetus has inherited from its parents for fetal monogenic disease diagnosis, and massively parallel plasma DNA sequencing enables the direct detection of fetal chromosomal aneuploidies from maternal plasma. The analytical power of these methods, namely sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and precision, should catalyse the eventual clinical use of non-invasive prenatal diagnosis.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                3 March 2016
                2016
                : 11
                : 3
                : e0150528
                Affiliations
                [001]Department of Pathology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Itabashi-ku, Tokyo, Japan
                Osaka University, JAPAN
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: YN HY NE ME. Performed the experiments: YN HY NE. Analyzed the data: YN HY. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: YN HY NE. Wrote the paper: YN ME.

                Article
                PONE-D-15-37219
                10.1371/journal.pone.0150528
                4777359
                26937682
                5d46842c-0900-4b1a-9063-e7479c6db12c
                © 2016 Nakayama et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 25 August 2015
                : 15 February 2016
                Page count
                Figures: 6, Tables: 1, Pages: 12
                Funding
                This work was supported in part by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) 25430142 from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan ( http://www.mext.go.jp/) received by ME, and Nihon University Multidisciplinary Research Grant (M14-012) from Nihon University ( http://www.nihon-u.ac.jp/) received by ME. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Separation Processes
                Distillation
                Research and analysis methods
                Extraction techniques
                DNA extraction
                Research and analysis methods
                Extraction techniques
                RNA extraction
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Molecular Biology
                Molecular Biology Techniques
                Artificial Gene Amplification and Extension
                Polymerase Chain Reaction
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Molecular Biology Techniques
                Artificial Gene Amplification and Extension
                Polymerase Chain Reaction
                Biology and life sciences
                Genetics
                DNA
                DNA electrophoresis
                Biology and life sciences
                Biochemistry
                Nucleic acids
                DNA
                DNA electrophoresis
                Research and analysis methods
                Electrophoretic techniques
                DNA electrophoresis
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Electrophoretic Techniques
                Gel Electrophoresis
                Agarose Gel Electrophoresis
                Physical Sciences
                Materials Science
                Materials by Attribute
                Pigments
                Dyes
                Fluorescent Dyes
                Physical Sciences
                Materials Science
                Materials by Structure
                Mixtures
                Solutions
                Diluents
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article