Advertisement

Plant Molecular Biology Reporter

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 161–175 | Cite as

Comparison of seven DNA extraction and amplification protocols in historical herbarium specimens of juncaceae

  • Lenka Drábková
  • Jan Kirschner
  • Ĉestmír Vlĉek
Protocols

Abstract

Seven DNA extraction protocols were used to obtain DNA from herbarium specimens ofJuncus andLuzula (Juncaceae) of various ages. DNA of historical samples is difficult to extract, and the extracts are seldom of good quality. The quality of DNA obtained was estimated by using a spectrophotometer to measure the A260/280 absorbance ratio. The total DNA yield was measured by a fluorometer. The results indicate the success of using both mixer mill grinding and a DNeasy Plant Kit. Another extraction protocol (grinding with mortar and pestle, using liquid nitrogen) yielded DNA from many samples. Modified CTAB extraction, with a lengthy precipitation, usually provided good amounts of DNA. Other protocols did not give satisfactory results.

Key words

cpDNA DNA extraction herbarium specimens Juncaceae Juncus Luzula PCR amplification 

Abbreviations

CTAB

hexadecyltrimetylammonium bromide

EtOH

ethanol

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bacci M, Checcuccii A, Checcuccii G, and Palandri MR (1983) Microwave drying of herbarium specimens. Taxon 34: 649–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balsev H (1996) Juncaceae, Flora Neotropica, Monograph 68, pp 167, Organization for Flora Neotropica, The New York Botanical Garden, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Cobb BD and Clarson JM (1994) A simple procedure for optimizing the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using modified Taguchi methods. Nucleic Acid Res 22/18: 3801–3805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Csaikl UM, Bastian H, Brettschneider R, Gauch S, Meir A, Schauerte M, Scholz F, Sperisen C, Vornam B, and Ziegenhagen B (1998) Comparative analysis of different DNA extraction protocols: A fast, universal maxi-preparation of high quality plant DNA for genetic evaluation and phylogenetic studies. Plant Mol Biol Rep 16: 69–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Doyle JJ and Doyle JL (1987) A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quatities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochem Bull 19: 11–15.Google Scholar
  6. Doyle JJ and Doyle JL (1990): Isolation of plant DNA from fresh tissue. Focus 12/1: 13–15.Google Scholar
  7. Hall DW (1981) Microwave: a method to control herbarium insects. Taxon 30: 818–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hiesinger M, Löffert D, Ritt CH, and Oelmüller U (2001) The effects of phenol on nucleic acid preparation and downstream applications. Qiagen News 5: 23–26.Google Scholar
  9. Hill SR (1983) Micowave and the herbarium specimen: potential dangers. Taxon 32: 614–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jansen RK, Loockerman DJ, and Hyi-Gyung Kim WD (1999) DNA Sampling from Herbarium Material: A Current Perspective. In: Metsger DA and Byers SC (eds) Managing the modern herbarium, An interdisciplinary approach. Society for the preservation of natural history collections, Washington, DC, pp 277–286.Google Scholar
  11. Metsger DA and Byers SC (1999) Managing the modern herbarium, an interdisciplinary approach. Society for the preservation of natural history collections, Washington DC, pp 384.Google Scholar
  12. Ristaino JB, Groves CT, and Parra GR (2001) PCR amplification of the Irish potato famine pathogen from historic specimens. Nature 411(6838): 695–697.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rogers SO and Bendich AJ (1985) Extraction of DNA from milligram amounts of fresh, herbarium, and mummified plant tissue. Plant Mol Biol 5: 69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rogers SO (1994) Phylogenetic and taxonomic information from herbarium and mumified DNA. In: Adams, RP et al. (eds) Conservation of plant genes II.: Utilization of ancient and modern DNA. Miss Bot Gard, Monogr Vol. 48.Google Scholar
  15. Ŝtorchová H, Hrdlièková R, Chrtek Jr J, Tetera M, Fritze D, and Fehrer J (2000) An improved method of DNA isolation from plants collected in the field and conserved in saturated NaCl/CTAB solution. Taxon 49: 79–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Taberlet P, Gielly L, Pautou G, and Bouvet J (1991) Universal primers for amplification of three non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Plant Mol Biol 17: 1105–1109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Taylor JW and Swann EC (1994): Dried samples: soft tissues, DNA from herbarium specimens. In: Herrmann, B and Hummel, S. (eds), Ancient DNA- Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  18. Wittzell H (1999) Chloroplast DNA variation and reticulate evolution in sexual and apomictic sections of dandelions. Mol Ecol 8: 2023–2035.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ziegenhagen B and Scholz F (1998) Methods for difficult plant species/tissues. In: Karp A, Isaac PG, and Ingram DS, Molecular tools for screening biodiversity., Plants and animals. Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society for Plant Molecular Biology 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lenka Drábková
    • 1
  • Jan Kirschner
    • 1
  • Ĉestmír Vlĉek
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of BotanyAcademy of SciencesPrůhoniceCzech Republic
  2. 2.Centre for Integrated Genomics and Institute of Molecular GeneticsAcademy of SciencesPrague 6Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations