METHODS FOR DNA QUANTIFICATION YIELD SIMILAR RELATIVE BUT DIFFERENT ABSOLUTE VALUES

被引:0
作者
Balanovsky, O. P. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Kagazezheva, Zh A. [1 ,2 ]
Olkova, M., V [2 ]
机构
[1] Vavilov Inst Gen Genet, Moscow, Russia
[2] Res Ctr Med Genet, Moscow, Russia
[3] Biobank North Eurasia, Moscow, Russia
来源
BULLETIN OF RUSSIAN STATE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY | 2019年 / 03期
基金
俄罗斯科学基金会;
关键词
DNA concentration; measurement method; real-time PCR; spectrophotometry; fluorometry;
D O I
10.24075/vrgmu.2019.043
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
DNA quantification is a routine yet important procedure that determines the efficacy of long-term sample storage and further manipulations with the sample. There are a few well-established methods for measuring DNA concentrations. However, it still not fully clear how concordant their results are. The aim of this work was to measure DNA concentrations in a set of samples using different quantification methods and to compare the obtained values. In 2 independent experiments, a total of 100 genomic DNA samples were analyzed using 3 different DNA quantification methods, including spectrophotometry (NanoDrop), fluorometry (Qubit) and real-time PCR (Quantifiler). The obtained relative concentrations demonstrated an excellent correlation (the correlation coefficients were as high as 0.98 to 0.99). However, the absolute concentrations showed a considerable variation and even a twofold difference. Spectrophotometry yielded the highest concentrations, whereas fluorometry yielded the lowest. The real-time PCR results were intermediate. The differences were more pronounced for the samples with low DNA concentrations. We recommend that such differences should be accounted for when estimating DNA concentrations using an arsenal of different quantification methods.
引用
收藏
页码:27 / 33
页数:7
相关论文
共 7 条
[1]   Population Biobanks: Organizational Models and Prospects of Application in Gene Geography and Personalized Medicine [J].
Balanovska, E. V. ;
Zhabagin, M. K. ;
Agdzhoyan, A. T. ;
Chukhryaeva, M. I. ;
Markina, N. V. ;
Balaganskaya, O. A. ;
Skhalyakho, R. A. ;
Yusupov, Yu. M. ;
Utevska, O. M. ;
Bogunov, Yu. V. ;
Asilguzhin, R. R. ;
Dolinina, D. O. ;
Kagazezheva, Zh. A. ;
Damba, L. D. ;
Zaporozhchenko, V. V. ;
Romanov, A. G. ;
Dibirova, Kh. D. ;
Kuznetsova, M. A. ;
Lavryashina, M. B. ;
Pocheshkhova, E. A. ;
Balanovsky, O. P. .
RUSSIAN JOURNAL OF GENETICS, 2016, 52 (12) :1227-1243
[2]  
[Беленикин М.С. Belenikin M.S.], 2018, [Генетика, Russian Journal of Genetics, Genetika], V54, P113, DOI 10.1134/S0016675818130040
[3]   Comparison of Methods for Accurate Quantification of DNA Mass Concentration with Traceability to the International System of Units [J].
Bhat, Somanath ;
Curach, Natalie ;
Mostyn, Thomas ;
Bains, Gursharan Singh ;
Griffiths, Kate R. ;
Emslie, Kerry R. .
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY, 2010, 82 (17) :7185-7192
[4]  
He HJ, 2018, BIOTECHNIQUES, V64, P59, DOI [10.4155/btn-2017-0102, 10.2144/btn-2017-0102]
[5]   Comparison of three common DNA concentration measurement methods [J].
Li, Xiaofei ;
Wu, Yuhua ;
Zhang, Li ;
Cao, Yinglong ;
Li, Yunjing ;
Li, Jun ;
Zhu, Li ;
Wu, Gang .
ANALYTICAL BIOCHEMISTRY, 2014, 451 :18-24
[6]   Pitfalls of DNA Quantification Using DNA-Binding Fluorescent Dyes and Suggested Solutions [J].
Nakayama, Yuki ;
Yamaguchi, Hiromi ;
Einaga, Naoki ;
Esumi, Mariko .
PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (03)
[7]   Comparison of five DNA quantification methods [J].
Nielsen, Karsten ;
Mogensen, Helle Smidt ;
Hedman, Johannes ;
Niederstaetter, Harald ;
Parson, Walther ;
Morling, Niels .
FORENSIC SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL-GENETICS, 2008, 2 (03) :226-230