These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
211 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32429170)
1. The Influence of DNA Extraction and Lipid Removal on Human Milk Bacterial Profiles. Ojo-Okunola A; Claassen-Weitz S; Mwaikono KS; Gardner-Lubbe S; Zar HJ; Nicol MP; du Toit E Methods Protoc; 2020 May; 3(2):. PubMed ID: 32429170 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. DNA extraction method influences human milk bacterial profiles. Cheema AS; Stinson LF; Lai CT; Geddes DT; Payne MS J Appl Microbiol; 2021 Jan; 130(1):142-156. PubMed ID: 32654260 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A comparison of the efficiency of five different commercial DNA extraction kits for extraction of DNA from faecal samples. Claassen S; du Toit E; Kaba M; Moodley C; Zar HJ; Nicol MP J Microbiol Methods; 2013 Aug; 94(2):103-110. PubMed ID: 23684993 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of different commercial DNA extraction kits and PCR protocols for the detection of Echinococcus multilocularis eggs in faecal samples from foxes. Maksimov P; Schares G; Press S; Fröhlich A; Basso W; Herzig M; Conraths FJ Vet Parasitol; 2017 Apr; 237():83-93. PubMed ID: 28268038 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Combined bacterial and fungal targeted amplicon sequencing of respiratory samples: Does the DNA extraction method matter? Angebault C; Payen M; Woerther PL; Rodriguez C; Botterel F PLoS One; 2020; 15(4):e0232215. PubMed ID: 32343737 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of DNA extraction protocols for microbial communities from soil treated with biochar. Leite DC; Balieiro FC; Pires CA; Madari BE; Rosado AS; Coutinho HL; Peixoto RS Braz J Microbiol; 2014; 45(1):175-83. PubMed ID: 24948928 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of four commercial DNA extraction kits for the recovery of Bacillus spp. spore DNA from spiked powder samples. Mölsä M; Kalin-Mänttäri L; Tonteri E; Hemmilä H; Nikkari S J Microbiol Methods; 2016 Sep; 128():69-73. PubMed ID: 27435532 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. An evaluation of the performance of five extraction methods: Chelex® 100, QIAamp® DNA Blood Mini Kit, QIAamp® DNA Investigator Kit, QIAsymphony® DNA Investigator® Kit and DNA IQ™. Ip SC; Lin SW; Lai KM Sci Justice; 2015 May; 55(3):200-8. PubMed ID: 25934373 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of Meconium DNA Extraction Methods for Use in Microbiome Studies. Stinson LF; Keelan JA; Payne MS Front Microbiol; 2018; 9():270. PubMed ID: 29515550 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Impact of DNA Extraction Methods on Stool Bacterial and Fungal Microbiota Community Recovery. Fiedorová K; Radvanský M; Němcová E; Grombiříková H; Bosák J; Černochová M; Lexa M; Šmajs D; Freiberger T Front Microbiol; 2019; 10():821. PubMed ID: 31057522 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Optimization of DNA extraction and sampling methods for successful forensic microbiome analyses of the skin and saliva. Yu KM; Lee AM; Cho HS; Lee JW; Lim SK Int J Legal Med; 2023 Jan; 137(1):63-77. PubMed ID: 36416962 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of the utility of five commercial kits for extraction of DNA from Aspergillus fumigatus spores. Nawrot U; Wlodarczyk K; Wrobel M; Wasik A; Dobosz T Acta Biochim Pol; 2010; 57(4):567-71. PubMed ID: 20978634 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of five commercial nucleic acid extraction kits for their ability to inactivate Bacillus anthracis spores and comparison of DNA yields from spores and spiked environmental samples. Dauphin LA; Moser BD; Bowen MD J Microbiol Methods; 2009 Jan; 76(1):30-7. PubMed ID: 18824041 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Biases during DNA extraction affect characterization of the microbiota associated with larvae of the Pacific white shrimp, Xue M; Wu L; He Y; Liang H; Wen C PeerJ; 2018; 6():e5257. PubMed ID: 30038871 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of seven methods for extraction of bacterial DNA from fecal and cecal samples of mice. Ferrand J; Patron K; Legrand-Frossi C; Frippiat JP; Merlin C; Alauzet C; Lozniewski A J Microbiol Methods; 2014 Oct; 105():180-5. PubMed ID: 25093756 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of commercial DNA extraction kits for whole metagenome sequencing of human oral, vaginal, and rectal microbiome samples. Wright ML; Podnar J; Longoria KD; Nguyen TC; Lim S; Garcia S; Wylie D bioRxiv; 2023 May; ():. PubMed ID: 36778319 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Biases on community structure during DNA extraction of shrimp intestinal microbiota revealed by high-throughput sequencing]. Wen C; He Y; Xue M; Liang H; Dong J Wei Sheng Wu Xue Bao; 2016 Jan; 56(1):130-42. PubMed ID: 27305787 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison Study of Four Extraction Methods Combined with PCR and LAMP for Feline Dąbrowska J; Karamon J; Kochanowski M; Sroka J; Zdybel J; Cencek T Pathogens; 2022 May; 11(5):. PubMed ID: 35631125 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]