The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Preservation of avian blood and tissue samples for DNA analyses
Abstract
A problem frequently faced by researchers involved in collecting tissues for DNA isolation is the preservation of samples in the field prior to and during their transportation to the laboratory. Prevention of DNA degradation is usually achieved through freezing. As this is not always practical, we have tested the efficiency of chemical solutions containing high concentrations of salts (e.g., NaCl, EDTA, and diaminocyclohexanetetraacetate) and detergent at preserving DNA in bird tissue and blood samples stored at ambient temperature for extended periods of time. For blood samples, we recommend the use of a buffer that lyses the cells and nuclei and contains 0.01 M Tris, 0.01 M NaCl, 0.01 M EDTA, and 1% n-lauroylsarcosine, Ph 7.5. Tissue samples are best preserved as small pieces in a saline solution made of 20% dimethyl sulfoxyde, 0.25 M EDTA, saturated with NaCl, pH 8.0. DNA extracted from samples preserved in these solutions for up to 24 weeks was compared with DNA recovered from tissue samples stored at −70 °C and blood samples stored at −70 and −20 °C. Yields were similar, averaging 300 μg/0.2 g of tissue and 500 μg/50 μL of blood. Quality of DNA in terms of fragment size, ability to be cut by restriction enzymes, and ability to hybridize to radioactive probes was also similar between cryopreserved and chemically preserved samples. Yields of DNA recovered from tissue samples preserved in 70% ethanol for 6 or 11 weeks was very low and significant degradation was observed. We have also examined how DNA contained in crude avian blood samples withstands freeze–thaw cycles. We found normal yields and no significant degradation of DNA in samples that experienced up to six cycles. We encourage field researchers who refrain from preserving tissue samples because of logistical problems, such as transporting liquid nitrogen containers in the field, to consider using these solutions. Both solutions can also facilitate exchanges of samples between laboratories, and they form an alternative to storage of samples at −70 °C for laboratories and museums with limited access to deep-freezing facilities.
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
Noninvasive genetic sampling: look before you leap
Taberlet, P., Waits, L. P., & Luikart, G. (1999) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(99)01637-7 · Cited by 1,078
INVITED REVIEW: Molecular analysis of predation: a review of best practice for DNA‐based approaches
KING, R. A., READ, D. S., TRAUGOTT, M., & SYMONDSON, W. O. C. (2008) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2007.03613.x · Cited by 657
PHYLOGEOGRAPHY AND HISTORICAL ECOLOGY OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC INTERTIDAL
Wares, J. P., & Cunningham, C. W. (2001) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.0014-3820.2001.tb00760.x · Cited by 503
Lessios, H. A., Kessing, B. D., & Pearse, J. S. (2001) · Evolution · doi:10.1554/0014-3820(2001)055[0955:psasit]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 417
Renshaw, M. A., Olds, B. P., Jerde, C. L., McVeigh, M. M., & Lodge, D. M. (2015) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12281 · Cited by 377
Metadata
- Authors
- Seutin, G., White, B. N., & Boag, P. T.
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Zoology
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 1991-01-01
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 82-90
- ISSN
- 0008-4301 (ISSN-L)
- 1480-3283
- OpenAlex
- W1992234981
- Cited by
- 1,695
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.03
- 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: Preservation of avian blood and tissue samples for DNA analyses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/z91-013
- The paper
- Seutin, G., White, B. N., & Boag, P. T. (1991). Preservation of avian blood and tissue samples for DNA analyses. Canadian Journal of Zoology. https://doi.org/10.1139/z91-013
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.