Comparison of Methodologies for the Extraction of Bacterial DNA from Mussels—Relevance for Food Safety

Abstract

The control of the microbiological quality of bivalve molluscs assumes particular importance because they are among the most produced seafood products and mostly consumed as a whole, raw, or lightly cooked. The composition of the bacterial community associated with bivalves depends mostly on the microbiology of the surrounding environment at growing sites. Once the relationship between microbiology of bivalves and environment is established, a better classification and monitoring of the shellfish beds and evaluation of depuration strategies can be achieved. In this work, we tested if the methods of DNA extraction commonly used for the culture-independent microbiological analysis of sediment and water could be used directly, or with modifications, for the analysis of bacteria in mussels. The commercial kits Genomic DNA Purification Kit (MBI Fermentas, Vilnius, Lithuania), UltraCleanTM Soil DNA Isolation Kit (MOBIO Laboratories, Inc., Carlsbad, CA) and the method described by Griffiths and collaborators for DNA/RNA co-extraction were compared. The efficiency of extraction was assessed by DNA fluorescence and the denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis gel patterns of 16S ribosomal RNA gene fragments were used to compare the reproducibility and representativeness of the extraction methods. Results showed that the DNA/RNA co-extraction method with modifications was the most suitable. However, the results must be interpreted in the light of the purpose of the study and the relevance of maximizing extraction yield or diversity estimate, without compromising reproducibility. To our knowledge, this was the first attempt to transpose the procedure currently used for DNA extraction from sediments or waters, to the analysis of whole mussels.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Anonymous (2004a) Corrigendum to Regulation (EC) Nº 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin (in Official Journal of the European Union L 139 of 30 April 2004). Official Journal of the European Union

  2. Anonymous (2004b) Corrigendum to Regulation (EC) Nº 854/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific rules for the organization of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption (in Official Journal of the European Union L 139 of 30 April 2004). Official Journal of the European Union

  3. Anonymous (2005) Commission Regulation (EC) Nº 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs. Official Journal of the European Union

  4. Anonymous (2007) Commission Regulation (EC) Nº 1441/2007 of 5 December 2007 amending Regulation (EC) Nº 2073/2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs. Official Journal of the European Union

  5. Anonymous (2008). Commission Regulation (EC) Nº 1021/2008 of 17 October 2008 amending Annexes I, II and III to Regulation (EC) Nº 854/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down specific rules for the organization of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption and Regulation (EC) Nº 2076/2005 as regards live bivalve molluscs, certain fishery products and staff assisting with official controls in slaughterhouses. Official Journal of the European Union

  6. Anonymous (2010) Diário da República, 2ª série-Nº 182–17 de Setembro de 2010, Despacho nº 14515/2010.

  7. Campos CJA, Cachola RA (2006) Internet J Food Safety 8:1

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chapman MG, Underwood AJ (1999) Mar Ecol Prog Ser 180:257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2001) PRIMER v5: User manual/tutorial. PRIMER-E, Plymouth, UK, p 91. Accessed 21 April 2012

  10. Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2006) PRIMER v5: User manual/tutorial. PRIMER-E, Plymouth, UK, p 192. Accessed 21 April 2012

  11. Croci L, Serratore P, Cozzi L et al (2001) Lett Appl Microbiol 32:57

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Cullen DW, Hirsch PR (1998) Soil Biol Biochem 30:983

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. FAO (2010) The state of world fisheries and aquaculture. (FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, Rome, 2010)

  14. Gillan DC, Speksnijder AG, Zwart G, De Ridder C (1998) Appl Environ Microbiol 64:3464

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gomes NCM, Flocco CG, Costa R et al (2010) FEMS Microbiol Ecol 74:276

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Griffiths RI, Whiteley AS, O’Donnell AG, Bailey MJ (2000) Appl Environ Microbiol 66:5488

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Gugliandolo C, Lentini V, Spanò A, Maugeri TL (2010) Lett Appl Microbiol 52:15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Henriques IS, Almeida A, Cunha A, Correia A (2004) FEMS Microbiol Ecol 49:269

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hernández-Zárate G, Olmos-Soto J (2006) J Appl Microbiol 100:664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Heuer H, Kroppenstedt RM, Lottmann J, Berg G, Smalla K (2002) Appl Environ Microbiol 68:1325

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hugenholtz P, Goebel BM, Pace NR (1998) J Bacteriol 180:4765

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Huss HH, Ababouch L, Gram L, FAO Fisheries (2004) FAO Fisheries technical paper. Assessment and management of seafood safety and quality. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United States, Rome, p 444

    Google Scholar 

  23. Joanne HD, Kroll RG, Grant KA (1995) Lett Appl Microbiol 20:212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lai X, Zeng X, Fang S, Huang Y, Cao L, Zhou S (2006) World J Microbiol Biotechnol 22:1337

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lees D (2000) Int J Food Microbiol 59:81

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Miller KM, Ming TJ, Schulze AD, Withler RE (1999) Biotechniques 27:1016

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Murchie LW, Cruz-Romero M, Kerry JP et al (2005) Innovat Food Sci Emerg Tech 6:257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Muyzer G, de Waal EC, Uitterlinden AG (1993) Appl Environ Microbiol 59:695

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Nübel U, Engelen B, Felske A et al (1996) J Bacteriol 178:5636

    Google Scholar 

  30. Oliveira J, Cunha A, Castilho F, Romalde JL, Pereira MJ (2011) Food Control 22:805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pinto AL, Teixeira P, Castilho F, Felício MT, Pombal F, Gibbs PA (2006) Aquaculture Res 37:1112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Power UF, Collins JK (1990) Appl Environ Microbiol 56:803

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Ramette A (2007) FEMS Microbiol Ecol 62:142

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Richards GP (1988) J Food Protect 51:218

    Google Scholar 

  35. Romalde JL, Area E, Sánchez G et al (2002) Int J Food Microbiol 74:119

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Rompré A, Servais P, Baudart J, de-Roubin M-R, Laurent P (2002) J Microbiol Meth 49:31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Rossen L, Norskov P, Holmstrom K, Rasmussen OF (1992) Int J Food Microbiol 17:37

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Shannon CE, Weaver W (1963) The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL

    Google Scholar 

  39. Silva HA, Batista I (2008) Publicações Avulsas do IPIMAR. Produção, salubridade e comercialização de moluscos bivalves em Portugal. Instituto de Investigação das Pescas e do Mar - IPIMAR, Lisboa, p 171

  40. Smalla K, Wieland G, Buchner A et al (2001) Appl Environ Microbiol 67:4742

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Thompson JR, Marcelino LA, Polz MF (2005) In: Belkin S, Colwell RR, Thompson JR, Marcelino LA, Polz MF (eds) Oceans and health: pathogens in the marine environment. Springer, New York, p 29

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wagner M, Amann R, Lemmer H, Schleifer KH (1993) Appl Environ Microbiol 59:1520

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Ward DM, Weller R, Bateson MM (1990) Nat 345:63

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Weisburg WG, Barns SM, Pelletier DA, Lane DJ (1991) J Bacteriol 173:697

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. WHO (2010) Safe management of shellfish and harvest waters, First edn.th edn. IWA Publishing, London

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology in the form of the Ph. D. Grant SFRH/BD/28747/2006. Funding was also provided by Biology Department and CESAM, University of Aveiro. The authors are grateful to Newton Gomes from the LEMAM/CESAM facility for technical support, scientific advice, and critical revision of the manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacinta M. Oliveira.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Oliveira, J.M., Cunha, Â.S., Almeida, A.P. et al. Comparison of Methodologies for the Extraction of Bacterial DNA from Mussels—Relevance for Food Safety. Food Anal. Methods 6, 201–209 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-012-9419-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Bacterial DNA extraction
  • Mussels
  • DGGE
  • Food safety