We are excited to announce that the repository will soon undergo an upgrade, featuring a new look and feel along with several enhanced features to improve your experience. Please be on the lookout for further updates and announcements regarding the launch date. We appreciate your support and look forward to unveiling the improved platform soon.
dc.contributor.author | Shuttleworth, Loraine![]() |
|
dc.contributor.author | Oosthuizen, Carel Jakobus![]() |
|
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-11-04T07:32:21Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-11-04T07:32:21Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022-02-18 | |
dc.description.abstract | Studies on genetic diversity, adaptive potential and fitness of species have become a major tool in conservation biology. These studies require biological material containing a reliable source of DNA which can be extracted and analysed. Recently, non-invasive sampling has become the preferred sampling method of such biological material; particularly when studying endangered species. Elasmoid scales from teleost fish are an example of non-invasive samples from which DNA can successfully be extracted. This study compared different extraction protocols to find an optimal method for extracting DNA from teleost fish scales. This was done with the intent to use the protocol that yielded the highest quantity of DNA on dried, archived scales. The protocols tested in this study included (1) phenol/chloroform with a TNES-urea digestion bufer, (2) phenol/chloroform with an amniocyte digestion buffer and (3) Qiagen DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit with variations in incubation times and temperatures of each protocol. While the phenol/chloroform with TNES-urea digestion buffer yielded significantly higher concentrations of DNA compared to the other protocols, all protocols followed in this study yielded sufficient quantities of DNA for further downstream applications. Therefore, while there are multiple viable options when selecting a DNA extraction protocol, each research project’s individual needs, requirements and resources need to be carefully considered in order to choose the most effective protocol. | en_US |
dc.description.department | Zoology and Entomology | en_US |
dc.description.sponsorship | The National Research Foundation. | en_US |
dc.description.uri | https://www.nature.com/srep | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Shuttleworth, L., Oosthuizen, C.J. Comparing DNA yield from fish scales following different extraction protocols. Scientific Reports 12, 2836 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-06889-y. | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 2045-2322 (online) | |
dc.identifier.other | 10.1038/s41598-022-06889-y | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/88142 | |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | Nature Research | en_US |
dc.rights | © The Author(s) 2021. Open Access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. | en_US |
dc.subject | Non-invasive sampling | en_US |
dc.subject | Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) | en_US |
dc.subject | Extraction protocols | en_US |
dc.subject | Extracting DNA | en_US |
dc.subject | Fish scales | en_US |
dc.title | Comparing DNA yield from fish scales following different extraction protocols | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |