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
Comparative Study
. 2020 Feb;171(2):275-284.
doi: 10.1002/ajpa.23978. Epub 2019 Nov 30.

Comparison of extraction methods for recovering ancient microbial DNA from paleofeces

Richard W Hagan  1   2   3 , Courtney A Hofman  2   3 , Alexander Hübner  1 , Karl Reinhard  4 , Stephanie Schnorr  2   3   5   6 , Cecil M Lewis Jr  2   3 , Krithivasan Sankaranarayanan  2   7 , Christina G Warinner  1   2   3   8   9
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of extraction methods for recovering ancient microbial DNA from paleofeces

Richard W Hagan et al. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2020 Feb.

Abstract

Objectives: Paleofeces are valuable to archeologists and evolutionary biologists for their potential to yield health, dietary, and host information. As a rich source of preserved biomolecules from host-associated microorganisms, they can also provide insights into the recent evolution and changing ecology of the gut microbiome. However, there is currently no standard method for DNA extraction from paleofeces, which combine the dual challenges of complex biological composition and degraded DNA. Due to the scarcity and relatively poor preservation of paleofeces when compared with other archeological remains, it is important to use efficient methods that maximize ancient DNA (aDNA) recovery while also minimizing downstream taxonomic biases.

Methods: In this study, we use shotgun metagenomics to systematically compare the performance of five DNA extraction methods on a set of well-preserved human and dog paleofeces from Mexico (~1,300 BP).

Results: Our results show that all tested DNA extraction methods yield a consistent microbial taxonomic profile, but that methods optimized for ancient samples recover significantly more DNA.

Conclusions: These results show promise for future studies that seek to explore the evolution of the human gut microbiome by comparing aDNA data with those generated in modern studies.

Keywords: ancient DNA; coprolite; gut microbiome; paleogenomics.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Aagaard, K., Petrosino, J., Keitel, W., Watson, M., Katancik, J., Garcia, N., … Versalovic, J. (2013). The human microbiome project strategy for comprehensive sampling of the human microbiome and why it matters. The FASEB Journal, 27(3), 1012-1022. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.12-220806
    1. Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289-300.
    1. Brooks, R. H., Kaplan, L., Cutler, H. C., & Whitaker, T. W. (1962). Plant material from a cave on the Rio Zape, Durango, Mexico. American Antiquity, 27(3), 356-369.
    1. Caporaso, J. G., Kuczynski, J., Stombaugh, J., Bittinger, K., Bushman, F. D., Costello, E. K., … Knight, R. (2010). QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nature Methods, 7(5), 335-336. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.f.303
    1. Cleeland, L. M., Reichard, M. V., Tito, R. Y., Reinhard, K. J., & Lewis, C. M., Jr. (2013). Clarifying prehistoric parasitism from a complementary morphological and molecular approach. Journal of Archaeological Science, 40(7), 3060-3066.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources