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
. 2024 Dec 30;17(1):397.
doi: 10.1186/s13104-024-07063-5.

Reducing DNA extraction costs through factorial design for the DNAdvance Kit

Affiliations

Reducing DNA extraction costs through factorial design for the DNAdvance Kit

Carson J Neal et al. BMC Res Notes. .

Abstract

Objective: Extracting DNA is essential in wildlife genetic studies, and numerous methods are available. However, the process is costly and time-consuming for non-model organisms, including most wildlife species. Therefore, we optimized a cost-efficient protocol to extract DNA from the muscle tissue of White-tailed Deer using the DNAdvance kit (Beckman Coulter), a magnetic-bead-based approach. We devised a 3 × 3 factorial design using combinations of tissue mass (10 mg, 50 mg, or 100 mg) and reaction volume (25%, 33%, and 50% of the manufacturer's recommended volumes). DNA was extracted for N = 81 tissue sub-samples (9 replicates/treatment).

Results: Our target yield was 500 ng of genomic DNA per sample, sufficient for population genetic assessments. A combination of 50 mg tissue and 25% reaction volume yielded enough DNA at the lowest cost. The factorial design revealed that varying tissue mass and reagent volume significantly affected extracted DNA yield. Our study demonstrates that sufficient DNA can be extracted at 75% lower costs than the manufacturer's standard protocol. Other researchers can directly use our modified DNAdvance protocol to perform cost-effective DNA extractions.

Keywords: Cost-effective genotyping; DNA extraction optimization; DNAdvance Kit; Factorial design analysis; White-tailed Deer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval: The animal tissue used in this study was collected through a voluntary statewide CWD testing program facilitated by the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission following the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service tissue and hair sample protocol. Human ethics and consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Interaction effect of tissue mass and reagent volume proportion on DNA concentration. Mean DNA concentrations (ng/µL) are shown for each combination of tissue mass (mg) and reagent volume (as a percentage of the manufacturer’s suggested total volume). Error bars show the standard error of the mean

Similar articles

References

    1. Dairawan M, Shetty PJ. The evolution of DNA extraction methods. Am J Biomed Sci Res. 2020;8(1):39–45.
    1. Poh JJ, Gan SK. Comparison of customized spin-column and salt-precipitation finger-prick blood DNA extraction. Biosci Rep. 2014;34(5): e00145. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Quincey D, Carle G, Alunni V, Quatrehomme G. Difficulties of sex determination from forensic bone degraded DNA: a comparison of three methods. Sci Justice. 2013;53(3):253–60. - PubMed
    1. Jackson DP, Lewis FA, Taylor GR, Boylston AW, Quirke P. Tissue extraction of DNA and RNA and analysis by the polymerase chain reaction. J Clin Pathol. 1990;43(6):499–504. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schiebelhut LM, Abboud SS, Gómez Daglio LE, Swift HF, Dawson MN. A comparison of DNA extraction methods for high-throughput DNA analyses. Mol Ecol Resour. 2017;17(4):721–9. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources