A comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologies

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorSantaus, Tonya M.
dc.contributor.authorLi, Shan
dc.contributor.authorSaha, Lahari
dc.contributor.authorChen, Wilbur H.
dc.contributor.authorBhagat, Siya
dc.contributor.authorStine, O. Colin
dc.contributor.authorGeddes, Chris D.
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-02T15:04:29Z
dc.date.available2019-10-02T15:04:29Z
dc.date.issued2019-07-23
dc.description.abstractThe ability for safe and rapid pathogenic sample transportation and subsequent detection is an increasing challenge throughout the world. Herein, we describe and use bead-beating, vortex, sonication, 903 protein saver cards, and Lyse-It methods, aiming to inactivate Grampositive and -negative bacteria with subsequent genome DNA (quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction) qPCR detection. The basic concepts behind the four chosen technologies is their versatility, cost, and ease of use in developed and underdeveloped countries. The four methods target the testing of bacterial resilience, cellular extraction from general and complex media and subsequent DNA extraction for qPCR detection and amplification. These results demonstrate that conventional high temperature heating, 903 protein saver cards, and Lyse-It are all viable options for inactivating bacterial growth for safe shipping. Additionally, Lyse-It was found to be particularly useful as this technology can inactivate bacteria, extract cells from 903 protein saver cards, lyse bacterial cells, and additionally keep genomic DNA viable for qPCR detection.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThis work is supported by the UMBCUMB Cholera joint training grant and the National Institutes of Health UMBC Graduate Training Chemistry Biology Interface Fellowship (T32GM066706-15). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.en_US
dc.format.extent16 pagesen_US
dc.genreJournal Articlesen_US
dc.identifierdoi:10.13016/m2fpco-xxjw
dc.identifier.citationSantaus TM, Li S, Saha L, Chen WH, Bhagat S, Stine OC, et al. (2019) A comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologies. PLoS ONE 14(7): e0220102. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220102en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220102
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11603/14959
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherPLOSen_US
dc.relation.isAvailableAtThe University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC)
dc.relation.ispartofUMBC Chemistry & Biochemistry Department Collection
dc.relation.ispartofUMBC Faculty Collection
dc.relation.ispartofUMBC Student Collection
dc.relation.ispartofUMBC Institute of Fluorescence (IoF)
dc.rightsThis item is likely protected under Title 17 of the U.S. Copyright Law. Unless on a Creative Commons license, for uses protected by Copyright Law, contact the copyright holder or the author.
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)*
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectVibrio choleraeen_US
dc.subjectListeria monocytogenesen_US
dc.subjectDNA extractionen_US
dc.subjectMicrowave radiationen_US
dc.subjectProtein extractionen_US
dc.subjectSonicationen_US
dc.subjectStaphylococcus aureusen_US
dc.subjectBacterial pathogensen_US
dc.titleA comparison of Lyse-It to other cellular sample preparation, bacterial lysing, and DNA fragmentation technologiesen_US
dc.typeTexten_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
A comparison of Lyse.pdf
Size:
2.35 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.56 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

UMBC Chemistry & Biochemistry Department
UMBC Faculty Collection
UMBC Institute of Fluorescence (IoF)
UMBC Student Collection