Development of new procedures for the isolation of phytoplankton DNA from fixed samples
Phytoplankton samples collected for routine monitoring programmes have traditionally been preserved with fixatives before subsequent analytical procedures such as microscope-based identification, or simply to permit transport between laboratories. In recent years, to simplify identification and enumeration, the use of DNA or RNA probes coupled with the PCR assay has progressed and now represents a routine procedure for screening cultured and field samples. However, the phytoplankton cells have often still to be treated as fixed samples.
The extraction of genomic DNA from fixed cultures of Alexandrium minutum cultures was compared using two new methods based on Magnetisable Solid Phase Support (MSPS) techniques with that using three commercial kits. Genomic DNA recovery and PCR amplification were observed and the results obtained from culture samples were validated using field samples. Among the DNA extraction techniques considered, the MSPS methods provided the best results.
Key WordsDNA extraction fixatives harmful algal blooms (HABs) magnetisable solid phase support (MSPS) PCR
Harmful Algal Bloom
Internal transcribed spacer
Magnetisable Solid Phase Support
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bolch CJS (2001) PCR protocols for genetic identification of dinoflagellates directly from single cysts and plankton cells. Phycologia 40: 162–167.Google Scholar
- Cho ES, Parek JG, Kim HC, Rhodes LL, Chung CS (1999) The rapid differentiation of toxic Alexandrium and Pseudo-nitzschia species using fluorescent lectin probes. J. Korean Soc. Oceanog. 34: 167–171.Google Scholar
- Godhe A, Anderson DM, Rehnstam-Holm AS (2002) PCR amplification of microalgal DNA for sequencing and species identification: Studies on fixatives and algal growth stages. Harmful Algae 27: 1–8.Google Scholar
- Guillard RRL (1975) Culture of phytoplankton for feeding marine invertebrates. In Smith WL, Chanley MH (eds), Culture of Marine Invertebrate Animals, Plenum Press, NY, pp. 29–60.Google Scholar
- Guillou L, Nezan E, Cueff V, Erard-Le Denn E, Cambon-Bonavita MA, Gentien P, Barbier G (2002) Genetic diversity and molecular detection of three toxic dinoflagellate genera (Alexandrium, Dinophysis and Karenia) from French coasts. Eur. J. Protistol. 153: 223–238.Google Scholar
- Portugal J, Waring MJ (1988) Assignment of DNA binding sites for 4′,6-diamidine-2-phenylindole and bisbenzimide (Hoechst 33258). A comparative footprinting study. Biochim. biophys. Acta 949: 158–168.Google Scholar
- Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T (1989) Molecular cloning: A laboratory manual, 3 vols., Cold Spring Harbor Press, NY,(S 6.15).Google Scholar
- Scholin CA, Marin R III, Miller PE, Doucette GJ, Powell CL, Haydock P, Howard J, Ray J (1999) DNA probes and a receptor binding assay for detection of Pseudo-nitzschia (Bacillariophyceae) species and domoic acid activity in cultured and natural samples. J. Phycol. 35: 1356–1367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Vila M, Giacobbe MG, Masó M, Gangemi E, Penna A, Sampedro N, Azzaro F, Camp J, Galluzzi L (2004) A comparative study on recurrent blooms of Alexandrium minutum in two Mediterranean coastal areas. Harmful Algae (in press).Google Scholar