Biochemical Genetics

, Volume 40, Issue 1–2, pp 53–62 | Cite as

Noncryogenic Preservation of Mammalian Tissues for DNA Extraction: An Assessment of Storage Methods

  • C. William Kilpatrick


Reliable field methods for the storage of tissues to be used for DNA extraction and amplification are critical to many studies employing molecular techniques. Protection from DNA degradation was compared among three commonly used methods of noncryogenic storage of tissues over a time scale of 2 years. All three methods prevented DNA degradation during storage for at least 6 months. DMSO (dimethyl sulfoxide)-salt solution provided the best protection from DNA degradation of tissues stored for up to 2 years. High molecular weight DNA was recovered from lysis buffer in which tissue was stored for 2 years, however, moderate amounts of degraded DNA was also present. High molecular weight DNA was recovered from tissues stored in ethanol for 2 years, however, the yield was relatively small compared to the other two noncryogenic storage techniques. Much of the DNA degradation in ethanol preserved tissues appeared to occur during the extraction procedure and can be reduced by soaking the tissue in lysis buffer for a few hours prior to beginning the extraction. The yield of PCR products was greatest from DNA extracted from DMSO-salt solution preserved tissues, whereas DNA from tissues stored in either lysis buffer or ethanol produced lower yields.

tissue storage noncryogenic DNA extraction degradation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arctander, P. (1988). Comparative studies of avian DNA by restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis: Convenient procedures based on blood samples from live birds. J. Ornithologie 129:205-216.Google Scholar
  2. Blin, N., and Stafford, D.W. (1976). A general method for isolating high molecular weight DNA from eukaryotes. Nucleic Acids Res. 3:2303-2308.Google Scholar
  3. Cockburn, A. F., and Seawright, J. A. (1988). Techniques for mitochondrial and ribosomal DNA analysis of Anopheline mosquitoes. J. Am. Mosq. Control Assoc. 4:261-265.Google Scholar
  4. David, N. A. (1972). The pharmacology of dimethyl sulfoxide. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. 12:353-374.Google Scholar
  5. Dessauer, H. C., and Hafner, M. S. (1984). Collections of Frozen Tissues. Assoc. Syst. Collections, University of Kansas, Lawrence, p. 74.Google Scholar
  6. Dessauer, H. C., Cole, C. J., and Hafner, M. S. (1996). Collection and storage of tissues. In Hillis, D. M., Moritz, C., and Mable B. K. (eds.), Molecular Systematics, 2nd edn., Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA, pp. 29-47.Google Scholar
  7. Freitas-Sibajev, M. G. R., Conn, J., Mitchell, S. E., Cockburn, A. F., Seawright, J. A., and Momen, H. (1995). Mitochondrial DNA and the morphological analyses of Anopheles darlingi populations from Brazil (Diptera: Culicidae). Mosq. Sys. 27:78-99.Google Scholar
  8. Houde, P., and Braun, M. J. (1988). Museum collections as a source of DNA for studies of avian phylogeny. Auk 105:773-776.Google Scholar
  9. Longmire, J. L., Maltbie, M., and Baker, R. J. (1997). Use of "lysis buffer" in DNA isolation and its implications for museum collections. Occasional Papers, The Museum of Texas Tech University, number 163, pp. 1-3.Google Scholar
  10. Mason, M. M. (1971). Toxicology of DMSO in animals. In Jacob, S.W., Rosenbaum, E. E., and Wood, D. C. (eds.), Dimethyl Sulfoxide, Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 113-131.Google Scholar
  11. Nietfeldt, J. W., and Ballinger, R. E. (1989). A new method for storing animal tissues prior to mtDNA extraction. Biotechniques 7:31-32.Google Scholar
  12. Saiki, R. K., Gelfand, D. H., Stoeffel, S., Scharf, S. J., Higuchi, R., Horn, G. T., Mullis, K. B., and Erlich, H. A. (1988). Primer-directed enzymatic amplification of DNA with a thermostable DNA polymerase. Science 239:487-491.Google Scholar
  13. Sambrook, J., Fritsch, E. F., and Maniatis, T. (1989). Molecular Cloning, A Laboratory Manual, 2nd edn., Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Plainview, NY.Google Scholar
  14. Seutin, G., White, B. N., and Boag, P. T. (1991). Preservation of avian blood and tissue samples for DNA analysis. Can. J. Sci. 69:82-90.Google Scholar
  15. Sibley, C. G., and Ahlquist, J. E. (1981a). Instructions for specimen preservation for DNA extraction: A valuable source of data for systematics. Assoc. Syst. Collections Newsletter 9:44-45.Google Scholar
  16. Sibley, C. G., and Ahlquist, J. E. (1981b). The phylogeny and relationships of the ratite birds as indicated by DNA-DNA hybridization. In Scudder, G. G. E., and Reveal, J. L., (eds.), Evolution Today, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 301-335.Google Scholar
  17. Sullivan, J., Markert, J. A., and Kilpatrick, C. W. (1997). Phylogeography and molecular systematics of the Peromyscus aztecus species group (Rodentia: Muridae) inferred using parsimony and likelihood. Syst. Biol. 46:426-440.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. William Kilpatrick
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of VermontBurlington

Personalised recommendations