DOCSLIB.ORG

A Comparison of DNA Quantification Values Obtained by UV Spectrophotometry (Including Nanodrop) and Picogreen Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Comparison of DNA Quantification Values Obtained by UV Spectrophotometry (Including Nanodrop) and Picogreen Analysis Technical note A comparison of DNA quantification values obtained by UV spectrophotometry (including NanoDrop) and PicoGreen analysis Introduction to the DNA samples, signals are read and After completing DNA extraction from a biological concentrations determined using a standard curve. sample, it is common practice to quantify the DNA As PicoGreen® only binds to double-stranded prior to using it in downstream applications. To DNA, it has the advantage that the reported ensure optimal performance, reactions that utilise DNA concentration is an accurate estimation of nucleic acids typically specify the input quantities the quantity of DNA that is present within in the of DNA that they require. sample and is not influenced by the presence of ssDNA or RNA. A disadvantage of this method is There are a range of methods available for the that it cannot be used to provide an estimate of quantification of DNA including absorbance, DNA purity. agarose gel electrophoresis and fluorescent DNA- binding dyes. The traditional method involves DNA extracted in LGC’s service laboratories measurement of the absorbance of the sample is routinely analysed using traditional UV using a UV spectrophotometer. DNA has a spectrophotometry as this provides an estimation maximal absorbance near 260 nm so UV light of of both DNA quality and quantity. If required, DNA this wavelength is passed through the samples. can be quantified using PicoGreen® in addition to Higher levels of absorbance are indicative of spectrophotometry (subject to additional charge). greater concentrations of DNA present within the This study provides a comparison of estimated samples. This method has the advantage that concentration values obtained using three the quality of the DNA can also be assessed; quantification methods, and offers insight into the absorbance at 280 nm is also measured to repeatability of the three methods. determine the level of protein contamination. Method The A260 / A280 ratio is indicative of the purity of the DNA samples and values of 1.8 or higher A set of 44 DNA samples, extracted in LGC’s relate to pure DNA samples. A disadvantage of laboratory from human blood samples using this method is that single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) our Kleargene chemistry, were quantified using and RNA also absorb UV light at 260 nm and three different methods. Two different UV can therefore interfere with the results and cause spectrophotometry instruments were used – a overestimation of the double-stranded DNA traditional plate reader, the FLUOstar Omega, (dsDNA) concentration. A wide range of UV and the NanoDrop – and the samples were also spectrophotometers are available, varying from quantified using PicoGreen®. traditional instruments that quantify DNA in plates 1. UV spectrophotometry: FLUOstar Omega plate or cuvettes, to instruments such as the NanoDrop reader – DNA samples were arrayed into a 96- (Thermo Scientific) that are designed to quantify well plate. Absorbance was measured at 260 DNA from micro-volumes of sample. nm and 280 nm on an FLUOstar Omega plate PicoGreen® is a fluorescent nucleic acid stain that reader. The absorbance reads were performed selectively binds to dsDNA. It has an excitation three times. An advantage of this method is maximum at 480 nm and emission of fluorescence that the volume of DNA used for quantification can be read at 520 nm. PicoGreen® is added can be returned to the original sample post-analysis. 2. UV spectrophotometry: NanoDrop (Thermo these samples, to ensure that DNA was at an Scientific) – DNA samples were quantified appropriate concentration for the PicoGreen® individually using the NanoDrop. 1 µL of each standard curve. Diluted DNA was arrayed sample was dispensed onto the pedestal and in triplicate into a 384-well plate alongside absorbance measured. The NanoDrop software DNA standard curve samples. An appropriate calculates a DNA concentration value based on volume of PicoGreen® was dispensed into the absorbance values obtained. Each sample each well, and the plate incubated at room was quantified on the NanoDrop three times. temperature, protected from light, for 5 minutes. Fluorescent signal was measured at 520 nm on 3. PicoGreen – a DNA dilution was performed, a FLUOstar Omega plate reader. based on UV spectrophotometry results for Results and Discussion Figure 2 illustrates the difference in mean concentration obtained by the three quantification DNA concentration and purity methods for a subset of the 44 DNA Measured DNA concentration of the samples samples tested. differed significantly between the three methods of quantification (F2 = 15, P <0.0001). Reported 180 DNA concentration was highest when samples 160 were measured using the NanoDrop (mean = 134 140 ng / µL), and lowest when samples were measured 120 using PicoGreen (mean = 87 ng / µL). Figure 1 100 UV Spec: illustrates the mean measured DNA concentration NanoDrop 80 for the 44 DNA samples, obtained using three concentration (ng / µL) UV Spec: A 60 different quantification methods. FLUOstar Omega 40 Mean DN PicoGreen 140 20 130 0 DNA sample 120 Figure 2. Mean DNA concentration for a subset of 15 of 110 the 44 DNA samples analysed. Green, orange and blue 100 bars illustrate the concentration estimate from NanoDrop, concentration (ng / µL) A 90 FLUOstar Omega plate reader and PicoGreen® methods respectively. DNA concentrations are consistently estimated 80 as higher using the Nanodrop platform than the FLUOstar Mean DN 70 Omega or PicoGreen methods. UV Spec: NanoDrop UV Spec: FLUOstar PicoGreen Omega As PicoGreen® is specific to dsDNA, the lower Figure 1. Mean measured DNA concentration for the 44 concentration values determined using this DNA samples analysed. method will be more reliable estimations of actual dsDNA whilst the values obtained by both UV Individual paired t-tests were performed to spectrophotometry methods are likely to have been ascertain which measurement methods significantly influenced by presence of ssDNA and / or RNA. differed from each other; adjusted P-values of P <0.0001 were obtained for all comparisons, The mean A260 / A280 ratio obtained using the indicating that DNA concentrations obtained Omega FLUOstar data for the 44 DNA samples with one method differed significantly from those was 1.8 which is indicative of pure DNA, and was obtained using the other two methods. very consistent across all samples (mean standard deviation = 0.02). These values are similar to the values obtained using the NanoDrop (mean A260 / A280 ratio = 1.9, mean standard deviation = 0.02). Repeatability of measurements To determine the repeatability of PicoGreen® analysis in our laboratories, a second dilution As each individual DNA sample was quantified plate was prepared from the same original by each of the three methods in triplicate, the DNA samples and the measurement procedure repeatability of each method can be calculated. repeated. DNA concentrations calculated for For all three datasets, the standard deviation this second dilution plate were compared to (SD) for each sample was calculated using those from the original dilution plate. Strong the three individual concentration values. correlation (R2 = 0.98) was observed between The mean SD, calculated using SD values the two datasets indicating that calculated from all samples, was then calculated. The DNA concentrations from two dilutions were mean standard deviation values for the three very similar. datasets are very comparable, as detailed in Table 1, indicating that repeatability of the two methods is very similar. The maximum sample SD (highest SD for an individual sample) is Summary comparable between the FLUOstar Omega and The NanoDrop, the FLUOstar Omega and PicoGreen datasets, but is much higher for the PicoGreen® are all reproducible methods for the NanoDrop dataset. The minimum sample SD quantification of DNA samples, although the results values (lowest SD for an individual sample) are obtained using the NanoDrop were more variable, comparable between the three datasets. as indicated by the higher maximum sample SD value. DNA concentration values determined by UV spectrophotometry were significantly higher Standard Quantification Method than those determined by PicoGreen®. Of the deviation UV Spec: UV Spec: PicoGreen® two UV spectrophotometry-based instruments, (SD) ng/ NanoDrop FLUOstar the values obtained using the NanoDrop were µL Omega consistently higher than those obtained using plate the FLUOstar Omega. The consistently higher reader values for the UV spectrophotometry methods are Mean attributable to the inability of UV spectrophotometry sample 9 9 11 to distinguish between double-stranded and single- SD stranded nucleic acids. Maximum sample 67 24 26 Although quantification values from PicoGreen® SD analysis are a more reliable measure to use Minimum in calculations of how much dsDNA to use in sample 1 1 3 downstream applications, UV spectrophotometry SD analysis is important as it enables the purity of Table 1. Comparison of repeatability of three methods the DNA to be estimated. LGC perform traditional for DNA quantification, based on 44 DNA samples. UV spectrophotometry (FLUOstar Omega plate Standard deviation values are comparable between the reader) as a standard procedure on DNA extracted two methods. in our service laboratories, but offers PicoGreen® analysis as an additional service, should this be required. Key words: DNA quantification; spectrophotometry, NanoDrop, PicoGreen www.lgcgroup.com/genomics • [email protected] Science for a safer world Brazil
Load more

Recommended publications
  • White Paper Absorbance Or Fluorescence: Which Is the Best
    WHITE PAPER No. 40 Absorbance or Fluorescence: Which Is the Best Way to Quantify Nucleic Acids? Natascha Weiß1, Martin Armbrecht1 ¹Eppendorf AG, Hamburg, Germany Executive Summary When performing molecular experiments on nucleic acids, it is a basic requirement to determine the concentration as well as the quality of the sample. The standard method which serves this purpose is UV-Vis spectrophotometry – but is it always the right choice? In the present White Paper, the advantages and disadvantages of this technique will be described and it will be compared with nucleic acid quantification via fluorescence. In this context, it will be discussed which situations warrant the use of which one of the two methods. The decision will generally depend on the condition of the sample as well as on the requirements of downstream applications. Since the advantages of both methods complement each other well, it is most practical to have the ability to perform both methods on a single instrument in a flexible manner. Introduction Experiments involving nucleic acids are a mainstay in any evaluated by measuring the sample at additional wave molecular laboratory. DNA and RNA are isolated from micro- lengths (230 nm, 280 nm) and calculating the purity ratios, organisms and from cells of higher order organisms in order i.e. the ratios of the values obtained at 260/230 nm and at to be employed in a broad variety of processing steps and 260/280 nm, respectively. In this way, it will be evident analyses. It is crucial for any type of downstream applica- whether cellular debris or remainders of reagent used during tion that a defined amount of nucleic acid is used and that purification such as proteins, sugar molecules, certain salts the sample is free from contaminations that may impact the or phenols, are present in the solution, as these will generate experiments.
    [Show full text]
  • On Food, Spectrophotometry, and Measurement Data Processing (Keynote Lecture)
    12th IMEKO TC1 & TC7 Joint Symposium on Man Science & Measurement September, 3–5, 2008, Annecy, France ON FOOD, SPECTROPHOTOMETRY, AND MEASUREMENT DATA PROCESSING (KEYNOTE LECTURE) Roman Z. Morawski Warsaw University of Technology, Faculty of Electronics and Information Technology, Institute of Radioelectronics Warsaw, Poland [email protected] Abstract: Spectrophotometry is getting more and more Despite philosophical abnegation of food issues, the often the method of choice not only in laboratory analysis of practice of food preparation and refinement has flourished (bio)chemical substances, but also in the off-laboratory for centuries, and inspired research-and-invention-oriented identification and testing of physical properties of various minds. Today, we may speak about a fully developed products, in particular – of various organic mixtures discipline of science and technology. Enough to say that the including food products and ingredients. Specialized Institute of Food Technologists – the largest international, spectrophotometers, called spectrophotometric analyzers are non-profit professional organization involved in the designed for such applications. This keynote lecture is on advancement of food science and technology – is the state of the art and developmental trends in the domain encompassing 23 000 members worldwide. Its Committee of spectrophotometric analyzers of food with particular on Higher Education provided the following definition of emphasis on wine analyzers. The following issues are food science: "Food science is the discipline in which the covered: philosophical and methodological background of engineering, biological, and physical sciences are used to food analysis, physical and metrological principles of study the nature of foods, the causes of deterioration, the spectrophotometry, the role of measurement data processing principles underlying food processing, and the improvement in spectrophotometry, food analyzers on the market and of foods for the consuming public" [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 Template Last Revised 8.28.12 Unit Title: DNA Extraction Date Developed/Last Revised: March 4, 2013 Unit Author(S): Jeani
    Unit Title: DNA Extraction Grade Level: 7 Date Developed/Last Revised: March 4, 2013 Time Frame: 60 - 270 minutes Unit Author(s): Jeanine Nakakura, Leslie Hamasaki Primary Content Area: Life Science/Biology UNIT DESCRIPTION: Students will extract DNA from strawberries. As an extension, students can extract DNA from other foods or their cheek cells, and develop a DNA Extraction kit. Big Ideas (Student Insights that Will Be Developed Over the Course of the Unit): • All living organisms—from bacteria to plants, animals, and humans—contain DNA • Genes and chromosomes determine the expressions of inherited traits • DNA is stored in a cell’s nucleus and can be extracted using a few simple steps Essential Questions (Questions that Will Prompt Students to Connect to the Big Ideas): • Why is DNA so important in biology? • How can I predict what traits will be passed from one generation to another? • How are genes and chromosomes important in determining heredity traits? BENCHMARKS/STANDARDS/LEARNING GOALS Science (HCPS III) Science • SC.7.1.1 Design and safely conduct a scientific investigation to answer a question or test a hypothesis • SC.7.5.2 Describe how an inherited trait can be determined by one or more genes which are found on chromosomes CTE (HCPS III) echnology T • Standard 1: TECHNOLOGICAL DESIGN: Design, modify, and apply technology to effectively and efficiently solve problems CTE (HCPS III) Engineering • CTE.7.1.1 Apply the design process through a set of methodical steps for turning ideas into useful and ethical products and systems • CTE 7.1.2 Assess a product or solution for possible modifications Page 1 Template last revised 8.28.12 Math (CCSS) Mathematics • 7.EE.3 Solve real-life and mathematical problems using numerical and algebraic expressions and equations Literacy (CCSS) 7 (WHST.7.2) Write informative/explanatory texts to examine a topic and convey ideas, concepts, and information through the selection, organization, and analysis of relevant content.
    [Show full text]
  • ELISA Plate Reader
    applications guide to microplate systems applications guide to microplate systems GETTING THE MOST FROM YOUR MOLECULAR DEVICES MICROPLATE SYSTEMS SALES OFFICES United States Molecular Devices Corp. Tel. 800-635-5577 Fax 408-747-3601 United Kingdom Molecular Devices Ltd. Tel. +44-118-944-8000 Fax +44-118-944-8001 Germany Molecular Devices GMBH Tel. +49-89-9620-2340 Fax +49-89-9620-2345 Japan Nihon Molecular Devices Tel. +06-6399-8211 Fax +06-6399-8212 www.moleculardevices.com ©2002 Molecular Devices Corporation. Printed in U.S.A. #0120-1293A SpectraMax, SoftMax Pro, Vmax and Emax are registered trademarks and VersaMax, Lmax, CatchPoint and Stoplight Red are trademarks of Molecular Devices Corporation. All other trademarks are proprty of their respective companies. complete solutions for signal transduction assays AN EXAMPLE USING THE CATCHPOINT CYCLIC-AMP FLUORESCENT ASSAY KIT AND THE GEMINI XS MICROPLATE READER The Molecular Devices family of products typical applications for Molecular Devices microplate readers offers complete solutions for your signal transduction assays. Our integrated systems γ α β s include readers, washers, software and reagents. GDP αs AC absorbance fluorescence luminescence GTP PRINCIPLE OF CATCHPOINT CYCLIC-AMP ASSAY readers readers readers > Cell lysate is incubated with anti-cAMP assay type SpectraMax® SpectraMax® SpectraMax® VersaMax™ VMax® EMax® Gemini XS LMax™ ATP Plus384 190 340PC384 antibody and cAMP-HRP conjugate ELISA/IMMUNOASSAYS > nucleus Single addition step PROTEIN QUANTITATION cAMP > λEX 530 nm/λEM 590 nm, λCO 570 nm UV (280) Bradford, BCA, Lowry For more information on CatchPoint™ assay NanoOrange™, CBQCA kits, including the complete procedure for this NUCLEIC ACID QUANTITATION assay (MaxLine Application Note #46), visit UV (260) our web site at www.moleculardevices.com.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of DNA Extraction Methods
    American Journal of www.biomedgrid.com Biomedical Science & Research ISSN: 2642-1747 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Review Article Copy Right@ Preetha J Shetty The Evolution of DNA Extraction Methods Mariyam Dairawan1 and Preetha J Shetty2* 1. Medical Student, College of Medicine, Gulf Medical University, UAE 2. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Gulf Medical University, UAE *Corresponding author: Dr. Preetha J Shetty, Associate Professor, Department of Biomedical Sciences, College of Medicine, Gulf Medical University, UAE. To Cite This Article: Preetha J Shetty, The Evolution of DNA Extraction Methods. 2020 - 8(1). AJBSR.MS.ID.001234. DOI: 10.34297/AJBSR.2020.08.001234. Received: February 18, 2020; Published: March 11, 2020 Abstract Since the first DNA extraction performed by Friedrich Miescher in 1869, scientists have made extraordinary progress in designing extraction methods that are more reliable, easier and faster to perform, more cost-effective and produce a higher yield. The classic liquid-liquid DNA extraction method involves the use of organic and inorganic reagents such as phenol-chloroform which pose a toxic threat to humans. Many newer techniques are now based on physical extraction, which has significantly contributed to developing simpler methods for DNA handling, such as extraction using magnetic beads and cellulose-based filter paper. With the advent of gene-editing and personalized medicine, there has been an increase in the demand for reliable and efficient DNA isolation methods that can yield adequate quantities of high-quality DNA with minimal impurities. The current review addresses the evolution of different DNA extraction techniques from solvent-based methods to physical extraction methods each with its varyingKeywords: set of advantages and limitations.
    [Show full text]
  • Improved Method for DNA Extraction and Purification from Tetrahymena
    Protocol Improved Method for DNA Extraction and Purification from Tetrahymena pyriformis Ezzouhra El Maaiden 1,2, Youssef El Kharrassi 1, Abdel Khalid Essamadi 1, Khadija Moustaid 2 and Boubker Nasser 1,* 1 Laboratory of Biochemistry and Neurosciences, Department of Biology, University Hassan I, BP 577, 26000 Settat, Morocco; [email protected] (E.E.M.); [email protected] (Y.E.K.); [email protected] (A.K.E.) 2 Laboratory of Applied Chemistry and Environment, Department of Chemistry, University Hassan I, BP 577, 26000 Settat, Morocco; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +212-067-373-9479 Received: 16 March 2019; Accepted: 13 May 2019; Published: 15 May 2019 Abstract: Tetrahymena pyriformis (protozoa) is intensely investigated as a model organism, offering numerous advantages in comprehensive and multidisciplinary studies using morphologic or molecular methods. Since DNA extraction is a vital step of any molecular experiment, here a new mixed surfactant (Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) 20%/Triton X-100) was adopted for effective DNA extraction from Tetrahymena pyriformis under an easy, fast protocol. The efficiency of this technique was then compared with three widely-used alternative techniques, namely the Chelex 100 matrix, Ammonium pyrrolidine dithiocarbamate (APD) complex and SDS–chloroform methods. DNA extraction was analyzed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, spectral measurement, fluorometry (Qubit), restriction enzyme digestion, and polymerase chain reaction. Data analysis revealed that the quantity and quality of the recovered DNA varied depending on the applied DNA extraction method. The new method (SDS 20%/Triton X-100) was the most efficient for extracting DNA from Tetrahymena pyriformis with high integrity and purity, affordable cost, less time, and suitability for molecular applications.
    [Show full text]
  • DNA Extraction
    DNA Extraction Learning Objectives: Students learn about DNA, cell structure, and basic chemical separations. GRADE LEVEL SNEAK PEAK inside … ACTIVITY 4–8 Students extract DNA from strawberries. SCIENCE TOPICS STUDENT SUPPLIES Solutions and Mixtures see next page for more supplies Techniques strawberries Organic and Biochemistry sealing plastic bags dish soap PROCESS SKILLS salt meat tenderizer Describing and Defining isopropyl alcohol, etc…. Explaining Evaluating ADVANCE PREPARATION see next page for more details GROUP SIZE dilute soap mix tenderizer and salt together, etc…. 1–3 OPTIONAL EXTRAS DEMONSTRATION If available, goggles are recommended for this activity. Modeling the Procedure (p. C - 22) EXTENSIONS Animal DNA (p. C - 29) Other DNA Sources (p. C - 30) TIME REQUIRED Advance Preparation Set Up Activity Clean Up 15 minutes 15 minutes 20 minutes 15 minutes the day before DNA Extraction C – 19 Chemistry in the K–8 Classroom Grades 4–8 2007, OMSI SUPPLIES Item Amount Needed strawberries 1 per group sealing plastic bags (e.g., ZiplocTM) 1 per group liquid dish soap ½ teaspoon per group 99% isopropyl alcohol (or lower, e.g., 70% ¼ cup per group rubbing alcohol) meat tenderizer 1 tablespoon per class OR OR papaya or pineapple juice ¼ cup juice per class salt 1 tablespoon per class tall, clear, narrow plastic cups (8 oz. or 12 oz.) 2 per group plastic spoon 1 per group pop-top squeeze bottles (e.g., water or sports drink) 1 per group freezer or bucket of ice 1 per class For Extension or Demonstration supplies, see the corresponding section. ADVANCE PREPARATION Supplies Preparation Strawberries: Purchase fresh or thawed, green tops on or off.
    [Show full text]
  • Detection and Quantitation of Residual Host Cell DNA
    Detection and Quantitation of Residual Host Cell DNA White Paper Author: Phil Kuhlman, Biopharmaceutical Technical Specialist 1 Abstract All biological drug products are required to be characterised for safety, quality and efficacy. ICH Q6B gives clear guidance on the requirements for product characterisation including the detection of product and process related impurities. This white paper discusses an approach to monitoring the levels of residual DNA derived from the production host for the drug including consideration of practical control of contamination as well as the MHRA’s guidance on performing PCR analysis. Contents Introduction 3 Process control 3 Batch monitoring 3 Quantitation of residual host cell nucleic acid 4 The requirement for sample extraction 5 HCDNA testing at RSSL 5 Validation of residual host cell DNA analysis 6 Contamination control and assay validity 6 Conclusion 7 2 Introduction Process control The expression of biological products using recombinant The demonstration to the regulatory authorities that DNA technology has enabled the use of peptides and the drug manufacturing process is able to routinely proteins for therapeutic use. One of the main concerns and consistently remove any possible residual DNA with this expression technology especially in immortal contamination leads to no further need for routine cell lines is the possibility of transference of the immortal residual host cell DNA release testing of individual trait to the end user of the medication. Thereby, batches. This would typically involve the demonstration potentially inducing cancer. of clearance of intentionally added host cell DNA, of the The World Health Organisation (WHO), has released size distribution expected in the drug manufacturing guidance1,2 requiring the monitoring throughout the process, at greater than the expected concentration of manufacturing process of HCDNA to demonstrate residual DNA to steps in the process and quantifying the reduction to safe levels, either by process validation or lot reduction in DNA.
    [Show full text]
  • Enzyme Analysis by Spectrophotometry - Plate Reader Method
    Enzyme Analysis by Spectrophotometry - Plate Reader method Enzyme Extraction Equipment and reagents: Machine/Product Reference (Company, Type, …) Centrifuge – cooled Eppendorf 5415R with F45-24-11 rotor Mixer Mill / Cryo Mill Retsch MM 400 with 2x PTFE Adapter rack for 10 reaction vials 1.5 and 2.0 ml. Microtube Vortex Ika Vortex 1 Plate reader BioTek PowerWave HT with Gen 5 software Microcentrifuge tubes Safe-lock, 1.5 and 2.0 ml Pipettes (+Multistep / Multichannel) 1-5 ml; 0.1-1 ml; 5-100 µl 8-tube strip PCR tubes Crushed Ice Liquid Nitrogen (+ thermos jar) PVP (Polyvinylpyrrolidone, PVP40) Sigma PVP40T TRIS (Tris(hydroxymetyl)-aminoethane) -1 99 %, 121.14 g.mol Sigma T1378 Na 2-EDTA (disodium salt dehydrate) -1 99 %; 372.2 g.mol Sigma ED2SS DTT (1,4-Dithiothreitol) -1 ≥ 99 %; 154.24 g.mol Sigma 43815 Hydrochloric Acid concentrated HCl -1 -1 -1 37 %; 1,19 g.ml ; 36.46 g.mol = 12.08 mol.l VWR 20252.290 Most buffers can be prepared in advance and kept at 4°C Requirement: the samples must be collected in 1.5 or 2.0 ml Eppendorf tubes at harvest. Prepare reagent working solutions: Extraction buffer (0.1 M TRIS ; 1 mM Na 2-EDTA; 1 mM DTT, pH 7.8) Dissolve 12.114 g TRIS (121.14 g/mol) + 0.3722 mg EDTA (372 g/mol) + 0.1542 g DTT (154.2 g/mol) in 900 ml distilled water, adjust to pH 7.8 with HCl (use 5M HCl) and dilute to 1 liter. Keep the extraction buffer on ice.
    [Show full text]
  • Microlab 500-Series
    MicroLab 500-series Getting Started 2 Contents CHAPTER 1: Getting Started Connecting the Hardware…………………………………………………………………………….…...6 Installing the USB driver…………………….…………………………………………………...………..6 Installing the Software…………………………………………………………………………..………...8 Starting a new Experiment………………………………………………………………………..……….8 CHAPTER 2: Setting up a MicroLab Experiment Adding Input Sources Sensor Variables……………………………………………………………………………….…………10 Adding a Sensor ………………………………………………………………………………………….10 Calibrating a Sensor………………………………………………………………………………………11 The Calibration Module………………………………………………………………………………......11 Adding a Calibration Point……………………………………………………………………………….11 Correlating the Data……………………………………………………………………………………....12 Adding More Variables………………………………………………………………………………...…14 Formula Variables………………………………………………………………………………………...15 Designing an Experiment The Programming Steps………………………………………………………………………..………..17 Displaying the Data…………………………………………………………………………..…….……..17 Controlling an Experiment Starting the Experiment…………………………………………………………………….………..…..18 Stopping the Experiment…………………………………………………………………….………......18 Repeating an Experiment………………………………………………………………………………..18 Switches A & B……………………………………………………………………………………………19 Analyzing the Data Graph Analysis…………………………………………………………………………..………..………19 Add a Curve Fit………………………………………………………………………….....……19 Data Analysis…………………….…………………………………………………………………..……22 CHAPTER 3 - Spectrophotometry (522/516) Calibrating the Spectrophotometer Reading a Blank………...…………………………………………………………………………..…….23 3 Reading
    [Show full text]
  • Validation of Spectrophotometric Microplate
    a Food Science and Technology ISSN 0101-2061 DDII: httpI://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-457X.36216 Validation of spectrophotometric microplate methods for polyphenol oxidase and peroxidase activities analysis in fruits and vegetables Érica Sayuri SIGUEMDTD1, Jorge Andrey Wilhelms GUT1,2* Abstract Enzymes polyphenol oxidase (PPD) and peroxidase (PDD) play important roles in the processing of fruits and vegetables, since they can produce undesirable changes in color, texture and flavor. Classical methods of activity assessment are based on cuvette spectrophotometric readings. This work aims to propose, to validate and to test microplate spectrophotometric methods. Samples of apple juice and lyophilized enzymes from mushroom and horseradish were analyzed by the cuvette and microplate methods and it was possible to validate the microplate assays with satisfactory results regarding linearity, repeatability, accuracy along with quantitation and detection limits. The proposed microplate methods proved to be reliable and reproducible as the classical methods besides having the advantages of allowing simultaneous analysis and requiring a reduced amount of samples and reactants, which can beneficial to the study of enzyme inactivation in the processing of fruits and vegetables. Keywords: microplate; polyphenol oxidase; peroxidase; enzymatic assay; apple juice. Practical Application: Rapid assessment of PDD/PPD activities in fruits and vegetables with reduced amounts of reactants. 1 Introduction Monitoring the activity of enzymes polyphenol oxidase 2002). The selection of the appropriate substrate is also important, (PPD, E.C.1.14.18.1) and peroxidase (PDD, E.C.1.11.1.7) is an seeing that the colored compounds formed from the oxidation important control point for harvesting, storing and processing products have their maximum absorption at different wavelengths of fruits and vegetables.
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Evidence for Transgenerational Epigenetic Memory in Arabidopsis Thaliana Following Spaceflight ✉ Peipei Xu 1,2, Haiying Chen1,2, Jinbo Hu1 & Weiming Cai 1
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-021-02342-4 OPEN Potential evidence for transgenerational epigenetic memory in Arabidopsis thaliana following spaceflight ✉ Peipei Xu 1,2, Haiying Chen1,2, Jinbo Hu1 & Weiming Cai 1 Plants grown in spaceflight exhibited differential methylation responses and this is important because plants are sessile, they are constantly exposed to a variety of environmental pres- sures and respond to them in many ways. We previously showed that the Arabidopsis genome exhibited lower methylation level after spaceflight for 60 h in orbit. Here, using the offspring of the seedlings grown in microgravity environment in the SJ-10 satellite for 11 days and 1234567890():,; returned to Earth, we systematically studied the potential effects of spaceflight on DNA methylation, transcriptome, and phenotype in the offspring. Whole-genome methylation analysis in the first generation of offspring (F1) showed that, although there was no significant difference in methylation level as had previously been observed in the parent plants, some residual imprints of DNA methylation differences were detected. Combined DNA methylation and RNA-sequencing analysis indicated that expression of many pathways, such as the abscisic acid-activated pathway, protein phosphorylation, and nitrate signaling pathway, etc. were enriched in the F1 population. As some phenotypic differences still existed in the F2 generation, it was suggested that these epigenetic DNA methylation modifications were partially retained, resulting in phenotypic differences in the offspring. Furthermore, some of the spaceflight-induced heritable differentially methylated regions (DMRs) were retained. Changes in epigenetic modifications caused by spaceflight affected the growth of two future seed generations. Altogether, our research is helpful in better understanding the adaptation mechanism of plants to the spaceflight environment.
    [Show full text]