The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Use of Propidium Monoazide for Live/Dead Distinction in Microbial Ecology
Open accessAbstract
One of the prerequisites of making ecological conclusions derived from genetic fingerprints is that bacterial community profiles reflect the live portion of the sample of interest. Propidium monoazide is a membrane-impermeant dye that selectively penetrates cells with compromised membranes, which can be considered dead. Once inside the cells, PMA intercalates into the DNA and can be covalently cross-linked to it, which strongly inhibits PCR amplification. By using PCR after PMA treatment, the analysis of bacterial communities can theoretically be limited to cells with intact cell membranes. Four experiments were performed to study the usefulness of PMA treatment of mixed bacterial communities comprising both intact and compromised cells in combination with end-point PCR by generating community profiles from the following samples: (i) defined mixtures of live and isopropanol-killed cells from pure cultures of random environmental isolates, (ii) wastewater treatment plant influent spiked with defined ratios of live and dead cells, (iii) selected environmental communities, and (iv) a water sediment sample exposed to increasing heat stress. Regions of 16S rRNA genes were PCR amplified from extracted genomic DNA, and PCR products were analyzed by using denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE). Results from the first two experiments show that PMA treatment can be of value with end-point PCR by suppressing amplification of DNA from killed cells. The last two experiments suggest that PMA treatment can affect banding patterns in DGGE community profiles and their intensities, although the intrinsic limitations of end-point PCR have to be taken into consideration.
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
Relic DNA is abundant in soil and obscures estimates of soil microbial diversity
Carini, P., Marsden, P. J., Leff, J. W., Morgan, E. E., Strickland, M. S., & Fierer, N. (2016) · Nature Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.242 · Cited by 1,040
Fittipaldi, M., Nocker, A., & Codony, F. (2012) · Journal of Microbiological Methods · doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2012.08.007 · Cited by 425
Self-citationDavis, C. (2014) · Journal of Microbiological Methods · doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2014.04.012 · Cited by 372
Yergeau, E., Hogues, H., Whyte, L. G., & Greer, C. W. (2010) · The ISME Journal · doi:10.1038/ismej.2010.41 · Cited by 304
Checinska Sielaff, A., Urbaniak, C., Mohan, G. B. M., Stepanov, V. G., Tran, Q., Wood, J. M., Minich, J., McDonald, D., Mayer, T., Knight, R., et al. (2019) · Microbiome · doi:10.1186/s40168-019-0666-x · Cited by 267
Metadata
- Authors
- Nocker, A., Sossa-Fernandez, P., Burr, M. D., & Camper, A. K.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2007-08-15
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 5111-5117
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W2137977329
- Cited by
- 577
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Use of Propidium Monoazide for Live/Dead Distinction in Microbial Ecology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.02987-06
- The paper
- Nocker, A., Sossa-Fernandez, P., Burr, M. D., & Camper, A. K. (2007). Use of Propidium Monoazide for Live/Dead Distinction in Microbial Ecology. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.02987-06
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.