Abstract
BackgroundCassava leaf samples degrade quickly during storage and transportation from distant areas. Proper sampling and efficient, low-cost storage methods are critical for obtaining sufficient quality DNA and RNA for plant virus epidemiology and improving disease control understanding. This is useful when samples are collected from remote areas far from a laboratory or in developing countries where money and materials for virus diagnostics are scarce.ResultsThe effect of sample storage duration on nucleic acid (N.A.) quality on virus detection was investigated in this study. A simple, rapid, and cost-effective CTAB-based approach (M3) for single N.A. extraction was optimized and tested alongside two existing CTAB-based methods (M1 and M2) for N.A. extraction from fresh and herbarium cassava leaves stored for; 1, 8, 26, and 56 months. The amount and quality of DNA and RNA were determined using Nanodrop 2000 c U.V.–vis Spectrophotometer and agarose gel electrophoreses. The sample degradation rate was estimated using a simple mathematical model in Matlab computational software. The results show no significant difference in mean DNA concentration between M1 and M2 but a significant difference between M3 and the other two methods at p < 0.005. The mean DNA concentration extracted using M3 was higher for 1 and 8 months of leave storage. M3 and M2 produced high concentrations at 26 and 56 months of leave storage. Using a developed scale for quality score, M3 and M2 produced high-quality DNA from fresh samples. All methods produced poor-quality DNA and RNA at 8 and 26 months of leave storage and no visual bands at the age of 56 months. Statistically, there was a significant difference in the mean DNA quality between M1 and M2, but there was no significant difference between M3 and the other two methods at p < 0.005. However, Cassava brown streak virus (CBSV) and Ugandan cassava brown streak virus (UCBSV) were readily detected by RT-PCR from RNA isolated using M3. The quality of DNA declined per storage time at 0.0493 and 0.0521/month, while RNA was 0.0678 and 0.0744/month. Compared to the existing two methods, modified CTAB extracted enough high-quality N.A. in one-third the time of the existing two methods.ConclusionOur method provides cost-effective, quick, and simple processing of fresh and dry samples, which will quicken and guide the decision on when and what type of sample to process for plant disease management and surveillance actions.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.