The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Precise Measurement of the G+C Content of Deoxyribonucleic Acid by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography
Abstract
High-performance liquid chromatography is a promising alternative for determining the G+C content of bacterial deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). The method which we evaluated involves enzymatic degradation of the DNA to nucleosides by PI nuclease and bovine intestinal mucosa alkaline phosphatase, separation of the nucleosides by high-performance liquid chromatography, and calculation of the G+C content from the apparent ratios of deoxyguanosine and thymidine. Because the nucleosides are released from the DNA at different rates, incomplete degradation produces large errors in the apparent G+C content. For partially purified DNA, salts are a major source of interference in degradation. However, when the salts are carefully removed, the preparation and degradation of DNA contribute little error to the determination of G+C content. This method also requires careful selection of the chromatographic conditions to ensure separation of the major nucleosides from the nucleosides of modified bases and precise control of the flow rates. Both of these conditions are achievable with standard equipment and C18 reversed-phase columns. Then the method is precise, and the relative standard deviations of replicate measurements are close to 0.1%. It is also rapid, and a single measurement requires about 15 min. It requires small amounts of sample, and the G+C content can be determined from DNA isolated from a single bacterial colony. It is not affected by contamination with ribonucleic acid. Because this method yields a direct measurement, it may also be more accurate than indirect methods, such as the buoyant density and thermal denaturation methods. In addition, for highly purified DNA, the extent of modification can be determined.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Akkermansia muciniphila gen. nov., sp. nov., a human intestinal mucin-degrading bacterium
Derrien, M., Vaughan, E. E., Plugge, C. M., & de Vos, W. M. (2004) · International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology · doi:10.1099/ijs.0.02873-0 · Cited by 2,094
Bruns, A., Rohde, M., & Berthe-Corti, L. (2001) · International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology · doi:10.1099/00207713-51-6-1997 · Cited by 555
Eichorst, S. A., Breznak, J. A., & Schmidt, T. M. (2007) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.02140-06 · Cited by 334
GONZaLEZ, J. M., MAYER, F., MORAN, M. A., HODSON, R. E., & WHITMAN, W. B. (1997) · International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology · doi:10.1099/00207713-47-2-369 · Cited by 233
Self-citationKrooneman, J., Faber, F., Alderkamp, A. C., Elferink, S. J. H. W. O., Driehuis, F., Cleenwerck, I., Swings, J., Gottschal, J. C., & Vancanneyt, M. (2002) · International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology · doi:10.1099/00207713-52-2-639 · Cited by 226
Metadata
- Authors
- MESBAH, M., PREMACHANDRAN, U., & WHITMAN, W. B.
- Venue
- International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology
- Publisher
- Microbiology Society
- Published
- 1989-04-01
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 159-167
- ISSN
- 0020-7713 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-2102
- OpenAlex
- W2103448494
- Cited by
- 4,553
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Precise Measurement of the G+C Content of Deoxyribonucleic Acid by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1099/00207713-39-2-159
- The paper
- MESBAH, M., PREMACHANDRAN, U., & WHITMAN, W. B. (1989). Precise Measurement of the G+C Content of Deoxyribonucleic Acid by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-39-2-159
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.