Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Schlattmann, Peter / Tate, Jillian R. / Tsongalis, Gregory J.

12 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2013: 2.955
Rank 5 out of 29 in category Medical Laboratory Technology in the 2013 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Science Edition

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR): 0.860
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP): 1.046

VolumeIssuePage

Issues

Comparison of different collection procedures and two methods for DNA isolation from saliva

Jaroslava Durdiaková1, 2 / Natália Kamodyová1 / Daniela Ostatníková2 / Barbora Vlková1 / 1, 3, 4

1Institute of Molecular Biomedicine, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia

2Institute of Physiology, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia

3Institute of Pathophysiology, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia

4Department of Molecular Biology, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia

Corresponding author: Peter Celec, Institute of Molecular Biomedicine, Comenius University, Sasinkova 4, 811 08 Bratislava, Slovakia

Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Volume 50, Issue 4, Pages 643–647, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: 10.1515/cclm.2011.814, December 2011

Publication History

Received:
2011-03-22
Accepted:
2011-11-15
Published Online:
2011-12-07

Abstract

Background: The non-invasive, flexible and easy sample collection makes saliva an interesting source of DNA for research and diagnostic purposes. The aim of our study was to find the most suitable collection method for biological material from the oral cavity and the most effective DNA isolation technique for further analytic applications.

Methods: DNA was isolated from swabs, Salivette saliva, whole saliva and samples collected with a commercial set for scraping of buccal cells. Phenol-chloroform extraction and isolation using a silica membrane based commercial kit were compared. Quantity of bacterial and human genomic DNA was estimated using real time PCR. The effects of storage conditions on DNA recovery were assessed.

Results: Sample collection techniques significantly affected the quantity of DNA for both, silica membrane based and phenol-chloroform isolations. Whole saliva provided the largest number of bacterial and human genome copies after both extraction methods. Storage for 36 months at –20°C reduced recovery of human genomic DNA five times after silica membrane based extraction and 10 times after phenol-chloroform isolation.

Conclusions: Whole saliva was found to be the most suitable material for human and bacterial DNA isolation. Both compared methods are useful considering the quantity of extracted DNA.

Keywords: DNA extraction; phenol-chloroform; Qiagen; whole saliva

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.