Volume 36, Issue 2 p. 203-211
Original Article

Robust comparative performance of genomic DNA extraction methods from non-engorged phlebotomine sandflies

Nathália Alves Senne

Nathália Alves Senne

Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Veterinárias, Instituto de Veterinária, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
Huarrisson Azevedo Santos

Huarrisson Azevedo Santos

Departamento de Epidemiologia e Saúde Pública, Instituto de Veterinária, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
Thamires Rezende Araújo

Thamires Rezende Araújo

Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Veterinárias, Instituto de Veterinária, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
Patrícia Gonzaga Paulino

Patrícia Gonzaga Paulino

Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Veterinárias, Instituto de Veterinária, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
Leo Paulis Mendonça

Leo Paulis Mendonça

Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Veterinárias, Instituto de Veterinária, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
Haika Victória Sales Moreira

Haika Victória Sales Moreira

Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Veterinárias, Instituto de Veterinária, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
Tays Araújo Camilo

Tays Araújo Camilo

Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Biológicas, Departamento de Biofísica, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
Isabele da Costa Angelo

Corresponding Author

Isabele da Costa Angelo

Departamento de Epidemiologia e Saúde Pública, Instituto de Veterinária, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Correspondence

Isabele da Costa Angelo, Departamento de Epidemiologia e Saúde Pública, Instituto de Veterinária, UFRRJ Rodovia BR 465, km 07, Seropédica, RJ, 23890-000, Brazil.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 01 March 2022
Citations: 1

Funding information: Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Grant/Award Numbers: 310819/2018-0, 141351/2018-7; Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Grant/Award Number: E-26/203.294/2017; Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior

Abstract

The present study is a comparative analysis of DNeasy Blood & Tissue Qiagen® kit (Qiagen®, Hilden, Alemanha), salting out, HotShot and phenol–chloroform protocols to extract DNA from sandflies. In addition, a comparative test using sandflies with and without eyes evaluated the potential inhibitory effect in the cPCR. An inhibition test was performed using an exogenous DNA added to the qPCR. The genomic DNA quality of each sample was evaluated by cPCR based on the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (cox1) gene. The DNA extraction protocols showed the following percentage of amplification: HotShot (91.6% [55/60]), salting out (71.6% [43/60]), phenol–chloroform (95% [57/60]) and kit DNeasy Blood & Tissue Qiagen® (73.3% [44/60]). The phenol–chloroform method achieved a significantly higher frequency of cox1 gene amplification. The pigment present in the phlebotomine's eyes seems to inhibit cPCR reactions since the frequency of amplification of the cox1 gene increased in the sandflies without eyes (p < 0.0001). The HotShot method showed the highest inhibitory potential. These manual extraction techniques can be an inexpensive and effective alternative to study vector–pathogen interactions.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.