Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 543

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantification of Bias Related to the Extraction of DNA Directly from Soils

Open access
Frostegård, Åsa, Courtois, Sophie, Ramisse, Vincent, Clerc, Sylvie, Bernillon, Dominique, Le Gall, Francoise, Jeannin, Pascale, Nesme, Xavier, Simonet, Pascal·1999·Applied and Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

In recent years, several protocols based on the extraction of nucleic acids directly from the soil matrix after lysis treatment have been developed for the detection of microorganisms in soil. Extraction efficiency has often been evaluated based on the recovery of a specific gene sequence from an organism inoculated into the soil. The aim of the present investigation was to improve the extraction, purification, and quantification of DNA derived from as large a portion of the soil microbial community as possible, with special emphasis placed on obtaining DNA from gram-positive bacteria, which form structures that are difficult to disrupt. Furthermore, we wanted to identify and minimize the biases related to each step in the procedure. Six soils, covering a range of pHs, clay contents, and organic matter contents, were studied. Lysis was carried out by soil grinding, sonication, thermal shocks, and chemical treatments. DNA was extracted from the indigenous microflora as well as from inoculated bacterial cells, spores, and hyphae, and the quality and quantity of the DNA were determined by gel electrophoresis and dot blot hybridization. Lysis efficiency was also estimated by microscopy and viable cell counts. Grinding increased the extracellular DNA yield compared with the yield obtained without any lysis treatment, but none of the subsequent treatments clearly increased the DNA yield. Phage λ DNA was inoculated into the soils to mimic the fate of extracellular DNA. No more than 6% of this DNA could be recovered from the different soils. The clay content strongly influenced the recovery of DNA. The adsorption of DNA to clay particles decreased when the soil was pretreated with RNA in order to saturate the adsorption sites. We also investigated different purification techniques and optimized the PCR methods in order to develop a protocol based on hybridization of the PCR products and quantification by phosphorimaging.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/aem.65.12.5409-5420.1999

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 543

Metadata

Authors
Frostegård, Å., Courtois, S., Ramisse, V., Clerc, S., Bernillon, D., Le Gall, F., Jeannin, P., Nesme, X., & Simonet, P.
Venue
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
Published
1999-12
Volume
65
Issue
12
Pages
5409-5420
ISSN
  • 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5336
OpenAlex
W2098578317
Cited by
543
References
1
FWCI
19.47
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: Quantification of Bias Related to the Extraction of DNA Directly from Soils. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.65.12.5409-5420.1999
The paper
Frostegård, Å., Courtois, S., Ramisse, V., Clerc, S., Bernillon, D., Le Gall, F., Jeannin, P., Nesme, X., & Simonet, P. (1999). Quantification of Bias Related to the Extraction of DNA Directly from Soils. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.65.12.5409-5420.1999

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.