Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Jun 8:9:298.
doi: 10.1186/s13104-016-2104-5.

No filters, no fridges: a method for preservation of water samples for eDNA analysis

Affiliations

No filters, no fridges: a method for preservation of water samples for eDNA analysis

Kelly E Williams et al. BMC Res Notes. .

Abstract

Background: Advancements in the detection of environmental DNA (eDNA) for detecting species of interest will likely allow for expanded use of these techniques in the field. One obstacle that continues to hinder applications in the field is the requirement of a cold chain of storage for water samples containing eDNA. While eDNA has been successfully preserved using Longmire's lysis buffer applied to filters, it has yet to be tried with freshwater samples collected for eDNA detection of an invasive species. We tested the utility of Longmire's solution (100 mM Tris, 100 mM EDTA, 10 mM NaCl, 0.5 % SDS, 0.2 % sodium azide) as an additive to freshwater samples for preservation of eDNA.

Results: Environmental DNA was effectively preserved in 15 mL water samples with Longmire's solution added; eDNA positive detection was comparable to freezing the samples at -80 °C and occurred out to 56 days at the highest concentration (5 mL Longmire's solution: 15 mL sample water). Medium and low concentrations of Longmire's solution added to 15 mL of sample water generally preserved eDNA out to 56 days but not as well as did freezing or application of the highest concentration of Longmire's lysis buffer. Treatment and degradation time had a significant effect on average DNA concentration of samples, although not the interaction of treatment and time. Perfect detection occurred out to 56 days with the high Longmire's treatment group but DNA concentration was significantly lower at this time point compared to 28 days.

Conclusion: We conclude that Longmire's lysis buffer is a viable alternative to cold chain storage that can simplify the collection of eDNA by eliminating the need for filtering and allow more time for sample collection when added at our highest concentration (1 part Longmire's:3 parts water sample), which could translate to an increase in the chances of detecting a rare or elusive species.

Keywords: Environmental DNA; Freshwater; Longmire’s lysis buffer; Noncryogenic; Wild pigs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Number of positive samples (3/3 positive qPCRs) per treatment at 28 days (black) and 56 days (grey). Performance of Longmire’s buffer treatment compared to frozen positive control and no treatment negative control
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Average concentration of DNA measured per treatment (copies/μL) at 28 days (black) and 56 days (blue) showing the performance of Longmire’s buffer treatment at preserving DNA. Shown are averages for frozen positive control, high, medium, and low concentrations of Longmire’s, and the no treatment negative control (Calculated from values in Additional file 1). Note that the 28 days mean for “No Treatment” is directly under the 56 days mean as they are nearly equal. Symbols represent the mean and error bars are the mean ± 1SE

References

    1. Sutherland WJ, Bardsley S, Clout M, Depledge MH, Dicks LV, Fellman L, et al. A horizon scan of global conservation issues for 2013. Trends Ecol Evol. 2013;28(1):16–22. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2012.10.022. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lodge DM, Turner CR, Jerde CL, Barnes MA, Chadderton L, Egan SP, et al. Conservation in a cup of water: estimating biodiversity and population abundance from environmental DNA. Mol Ecol. 2012;21(11):2555–2558. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05600.x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Taberlet P, Coissac E, Hajibabaei M, Rieseberg LH. Environmental DNA. Mol Ecol. 2012;21(8):1789–1793. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05542.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ficetola GF, Miaud C, Pompanon F, Taberlet P. Species detection using environmental DNA from water samples. Biol Lett. 2008;4(4):423–425. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2008.0118. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Goldberg CS, Pilliod DS, Arkle RS, Waits LP. Molecular detection of vertebrates in stream water: a demonstration using rocky mountain tailed frogs and Idaho giant salamanders. PLoS One. 2011;6(7):e22746. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0022746. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources