Skip to main content
Log in

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

  • Published:
Molecular Biology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cambon-Thomsen A (2003) Assessing the impact of biobanks. Nat Genet 34(1):25–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cambon-Thomsen A, Ducournau P, Gourraud P-A, Pontille D (2003) Biobanks for genomics and genomics for biobanks. Comp Funct Genomics 4(6):628–634

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Greene JJ, Rao VB (eds) (1998) Recombinant DNA principles and methodologies, 1st edn. Marcel Dekker, Inc, New York

    Google Scholar 

  4. Miller SA, Dykes DD, Polesky HF (1988) A simple salting out procedure for extracting DNA from human nucleated cells. Nucleic Acids Res 16(3):1215

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Grimberg J, Nawoschik S, Belluscio L, McKee R, Turck A, Eisenberg A (1989) A simple and efficient non-organic procedure for the isolation of genomic DNA from blood. Nucleic Acids Res 17(20):8390

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Nasiri H, Forouzandeh M, Rasaee MJ, Rahbarizadeh F (2005) Modified salting-out method: high-yield, high-quality genomic DNA extraction from whole blood using laundry detergent. J Clin Lab Anal 19(6):229–232

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Garcia-Sepulveda C, Carrillo-Acuña E, Guerra-Palomares S, Barriga-Moreno M (2010) Maxiprep genomic DNA extractions for molecular epidemiology studies and biorepositories. Mol Biol Rep 37(4):1883–1890

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Iri-Sofla FJ, Rahbarizadeh F, Ahmadvand D, Rasaee MJ (2011) Nanobody-based chimeric receptor gene integration in Jurkat cells mediated by PhiC31 integrase. Exp Cell Res 317(18):2630–2641

    Google Scholar 

  9. Liu B, Zhang Y, Jin M, Ni Q, Liang X, Ma X, Yao K, Li Q, Chen K (2010) Association of selected polymorphisms of CCND1, p21, and caspase8 with colorectal cancer risk. Mol Carcinog 49(1):75–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Trejo-de la OA, Torres J, Pérez-Rodríguez M, Camorlinga-Ponce M, Luna LF, Abdo-Francis JM, Lazcano E, Maldonado-Bernal C (2008) TLR4 single-nucleotide polymorphisms alter mucosal cytokine and chemokine patterns in Mexican patients with Helicobacter pylori-associated gastroduodenal diseases. Clin Immunol 129(2):333–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wu Y, Jin M, Liu B, Liang X, Yu Y, Li Q, Ma X, Yao K, Chen K (2011) The association of XPC polymorphisms and tea drinking with colorectal cancer risk in a Chinese population. Mol Carcinog 50(3):189–198

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang Y, Liu B, Jin M, Ni Q, Liang X, Ma X, Yao K, Li Q, Chen K (2009) Genetic polymorphisms of transforming growth factor-β1 and its receptors and colorectal cancer susceptibility: a population-based case-control study in China. Cancer Lett 275(1):102–108

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Abd El-Aal AA, Abd Elghany NA, Mohamadin AM, El-Badry AA (2010) Comparative study of five methods for DNA extraction from whole blood samples. Int J Health Sci 3(1):285–287

    Google Scholar 

  14. Di Pietro F, Ortenzi F, Tilio M, Concetti F, Napolioni V (2011) Genomic DNA extraction from whole blood stored from 15 to 30 years at −20°C by rapid phenol–chloroform protocol: a useful tool for genetic epidemiology studies. Mol Cell Probes 25(1):44–48

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lyn R. Griffiths.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chacon-Cortes, D., Haupt, L.M., Lea, R.A. et al. Comparison of genomic DNA extraction techniques from whole blood samples: a time, cost and quality evaluation study. Mol Biol Rep 39, 5961–5966 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-011-1408-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-011-1408-8

Keywords

Navigation