↓ Skip to main content

A comparison of methods for total community DNA preservation and extraction from various thermal environments

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology, July 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
153 Mendeley
Title
A comparison of methods for total community DNA preservation and extraction from various thermal environments
Published in
Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology, July 2008
DOI 10.1007/s10295-008-0393-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kendra R Mitchell, Cristina D Takacs-Vesbach

Abstract

The widespread use of molecular techniques in studying microbial communities has greatly enhanced our understanding of microbial diversity and function in the natural environment and contributed to an explosion of novel commercially viable enzymes. One of the most promising environments for detecting novel processes, enzymes, and microbial diversity is hot springs. We examined potential biases introduced by DNA preservation and extraction methods by comparing the quality, quantity, and diversity of environmental DNA samples preserved and extracted by commonly used methods. We included samples from sites representing the spectrum of environmental conditions that are found in Yellowstone National Park thermal features. Samples preserved in a non-toxic sucrose lysis buffer (SLB), along with a variation of a standard DNA extraction method using CTAB resulted in higher quality and quantity DNA than the other preservation and extraction methods tested here. Richness determined using DGGE revealed that there was some variation within replicates of a sample, but no statistical difference among the methods. However, the sucrose lysis buffer preserved samples extracted by the CTAB method were 15-43% more diverse than the other treatments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 4%
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Estonia 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 141 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 25%
Researcher 36 24%
Student > Master 20 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 8%
Other 18 12%
Unknown 16 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 79 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 14%
Environmental Science 10 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 3%
Other 9 6%
Unknown 21 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 May 2022.
All research outputs
#13,175,705
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology
#896
of 1,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,418
of 67,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology
#15
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,301 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 67,238 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.