Table 4. Comparison of pure DNA yield and purity, obtained from four strains of E. siliculosus by two different methods: the new and old [47].
Strain | Starting Material Weight (mg fresh tissue) | A260/280 | A260/230 | DNA conc. (ng/µl) | Total DNA (µg)(a) | DNA Yield | ||||||
(µg/mg) | ||||||||||||
New | Old | New | Old | New | Old | New | Old | New | Old | |||
Polluted | REP 10.11 | 25 | 2.01±0.01 | 1.66±0.01 | 2.20±0.04 | 1.37±0.01 | 132.9±11.3 | 45.0±2.53 | 5.31±0.46 | 1.8±0.18 | 0.212±0.018* | 0.071±0.006 |
50 | 1.91±0.01 | 1.54±0.04 | 2.00±0.01 | 1.17±0.02 | 181.4±15.6 | 69.3±2.76 | 7.24±0.60 | 2.79±0.27 | 0.145±0.012* | 0.056±0.009 | ||
100 | 1.86±0.01 | 1.59±0.03 | 1.86±0.02 | 1.15±0.01 | 389.6±5.9 | 123.3±4.34 | 15.56±0.24 | 4.94±0.48 | 0.156±0.002* | 0.049±0.006 | ||
EC 524 | 25 | 1.96±0.03 | 1.59±0.01 | 1.75±0.02 | 1.36±0.01 | 96.5±5.6 | 58.0±2.51 | 3.86±0.42 | 2.32±0.45 | 0.155±0.015* | 0.093±0.013 | |
50 | 1.92±0.01 | 1.60±0.02 | 1.66±0.03 | 1.27±0.01 | 213.4±10.6 | 124.3±5.43 | 8.54±0.55 | 4.98±0.84 | 0.171±0.017* | 0.099±0.014 | ||
100 | 1.85±0.02 | 1.56±0.02 | 1.65±0.03 | 1.15±0.01 | 314.6±5.7 | 139.5±4.82 | 12.56±0.75 | 5.57±0.62 | 0.126±0.016* | 0.056±0.006 | ||
Pristine | LIA 4A | 25 | 1.91±0.01 | 1.25±0.02 | 1.76±0.02 | 1.61±0.01 | 274.7±16.6 | 226.2±6.92 | 10.97±0.42 | 9.04±0.58 | 0.438±0.029* | 0.36±0.009 |
50 | 1.87±0.01 | 1.19±0.01 | 1.73±0.02 | 1.62±0.02 | 357.1±7.5 | 332.0±7.43 | 14.26±0.96 | 13.26±1.34 | 0.284±0.024 | 0.26±0.007 | ||
100 | 1.81±0.02 | 1.20±0.02 | 1.73±0.02 | 1.59±0.02 | 653.9±40.8 | 515.4±5.73 | 26.14±1.28 | 20.62±2.65 | 0.261±0.031* | 0.21±0.008 | ||
RHO 12 | 25 | 1.83±0.02 | 1.25±0.03 | 1.63±0.01 | 0.69±0.02 | 207.6±2.62 | 93.5±3.23 | 8.30±0.11 | 3.74±0.83 | 0.332±0.004* | 0.15±0.009 | |
50 | 1.80±0.01 | 1.19±0.02 | 1.60±0.01 | 0.67±0.02 | 307.2±15.2 | 157.9±2.11 | 12.28±0.61 | 6.33±0.95 | 0.246±0.012* | 0.13±0.01 | ||
100 | 1.80±0.02 | 1.15±0.03 | 1.61±0.01 | 0.63±0.01 | 390.6±52.1 | 253.0±2.43 | 15.60±2.08 | 10.10±2.41 | 0.156±0.020 | 0.10±0.01 |
Total amounts of nucleic acids were calculated in a final volume of 40 µL.
Data are reported as means ± SE from five independent nucleic acid extractions, for both methods. ‘New’ refers to the method developed in this study; ‘Old’ refers to a previously published protocol based on CTAB extraction buffer. According to one-way ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey Test at 95% confidence interval, an asterisk (*) indicates the significantly differences between the yields of the two methods.