Skip to main content
. 2021 Aug 18;77(12):5509–5521. doi: 10.1002/ps.6591

Table 4.

Summary of results for all Khapra beetles tested by various DNA extraction methods, from dry or ethanol preserved samples

Khapra LAMP 18S LAMP
Time (min) Temperature (°C) Time (min) Temperature (°C)
DNA extraction method Destructive (D), non‐destructive (ND) Extraction type Preservation method n (failed) mean ± SD mean ± SD mean ± SD mean ± SD
Qiagen column D ‘Clean’ Dry 2 (1) 21.5 ± 0 77.5 ± 0 17.2 ± 0 88.7 ± 0
Qiagen column D ‘Clean’ Ethanol 2 (0) 15.2 ± 1.3 77.7 ± 0 13.3 ± 0 88.9 ± 0
Qiagen column ND ‘Clean’ Dry 5 (0) 20.4 ± 2.2 77.3 ± 0.1 17.3 ± 3.8 88.5 ± 0.2
Qiagen column ND ‘Clean’ Ethanol 4 (1) 21.5 ± 2.4 77.5 ± 0.2 19.5 ± 0.3 88.5 ± 0.3
HS6 ND ‘Crude’ Dry 3 (0) 21.1 ± 1.5 77.6 ± 0.2 18.6 ± 2.0 88.7 ± 0
HS6 ND ‘Crude’ Ethanol 6 (4) 17.5 ± 1.1 78.3 ± 0 16.6 ± 1.3 88.8 ± 0
QuickExtract™ ND ‘Crude’ Dry 3 (0) 17.9 ± 2.4 78.2 ± 0.4 14.1 ± 1.3 88.6 ± 0
QuickExtract™ ND ‘Crude’ Ethanol 6 (1) 23.6 ± 0.8 77.2 ± 0.3 20.8 ± 2.1 88.5 ± 0.2
All methods 31 (7) 19.8 ± 2.6 77.7 ± 0.4 17.2 ± 2.4 88.7 ± 0.2

Individual specimen results are in Table 2. SD, standard deviation.