Comparison of genomic DNA extraction techniques from whole blood samples: a time, cost and quality evaluation study.

Diego Chacon-Cortes, Larisa M Haupt, Rod A Lea, Lyn R Griffiths
Author Information
  1. Diego Chacon-Cortes: Genomics Research Centre, Griffith Health Institute, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, Parklands Drive, Southport, QLD, 4215, Australia.

Abstract

Genomic DNA obtained from patient whole blood samples is a key element for genomic research. Advantages and disadvantages, in terms of time-efficiency, cost-effectiveness and laboratory requirements, of procedures available to isolate nucleic acids need to be considered before choosing any particular method. These characteristics have not been fully evaluated for some laboratory techniques, such as the salting out method for DNA extraction, which has been excluded from comparison in different studies published to date. We compared three different protocols (a traditional salting out method, a modified salting out method and a commercially available kit method) to determine the most cost-effective and time-efficient method to extract DNA. We extracted genomic DNA from whole blood samples obtained from breast cancer patient volunteers and compared the results of the product obtained in terms of quantity (concentration of DNA extracted and DNA obtained per ml of blood used) and quality (260/280 ratio and polymerase chain reaction product amplification) of the obtained yield. On average, all three methods showed no statistically significant differences between the final result, but when we accounted for time and cost derived for each method, they showed very significant differences. The modified salting out method resulted in a seven- and twofold reduction in cost compared to the commercial kit and traditional salting out method, respectively and reduced time from 3 days to 1 hour compared to the traditional salting out method. This highlights a modified salting out method as a suitable choice to be used in laboratories and research centres, particularly when dealing with a large number of samples.

References

  1. Mol Carcinog. 2011 Mar;50(3):189-98 [PMID: 21104992]
  2. Nucleic Acids Res. 1989 Oct 25;17(20):8390 [PMID: 2813076]
  3. Nucleic Acids Res. 1988 Feb 11;16(3):1215 [PMID: 3344216]
  4. Nat Genet. 2003 May;34(1):25-6 [PMID: 12721553]
  5. J Clin Lab Anal. 2005;19(6):229-32 [PMID: 16302208]
  6. Mol Biol Rep. 2010 Apr;37(4):1883-90 [PMID: 19609718]
  7. Exp Cell Res. 2011 Nov 1;317(18):2630-41 [PMID: 21906589]
  8. Mol Cell Probes. 2011 Feb;25(1):44-8 [PMID: 21029772]
  9. Comp Funct Genomics. 2003;4(6):628-34 [PMID: 18629026]
  10. Cancer Lett. 2009 Mar 8;275(1):102-8 [PMID: 19036501]
  11. Clin Immunol. 2008 Nov;129(2):333-40 [PMID: 18755634]
  12. Mol Carcinog. 2010 Jan;49(1):75-84 [PMID: 19795398]

MeSH Term

Blood Specimen Collection
DNA
Electrophoresis, Agar Gel
Evaluation Studies as Topic
Genome, Human
Humans
Molecular Biology
Polymerase Chain Reaction
Spectrophotometry
Time Factors

Chemicals

DNA

Word Cloud

Similar Articles

Cited By