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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34009591)

  • 1. Purification and Amplification of DNA from Cellulolytic Bacteria: Application for Biogas Production from Crop Residues.
    Kamusoko R; Jingura RM; Parawira W; Chikwambi Z
    Methods Mol Biol; 2021; 2290():187-201. PubMed ID: 34009591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Extraction and purification of DNA in rhizosphere soil samples for PCR-DGGE analysis of bacterial consortia.
    Maarit Niemi R; Heiskanen I; Wallenius K; Lindström K
    J Microbiol Methods; 2001 Jul; 45(3):155-65. PubMed ID: 11348673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of the DNA fingerprinting method AFLP as an new tool in bacterial taxonomy.
    Janssen P; Coopman R; Huys G; Swings J; Bleeker M; Vos P; Zabeau M; Kersters K
    Microbiology (Reading); 1996 Jul; 142 ( Pt 7)():1881-93. PubMed ID: 8757752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparative genotyping of Clostridium thermocellum strains isolated from biogas plants: genetic markers and characterization of cellulolytic potential.
    Koeck DE; Zverlov VV; Liebl W; Schwarz WH
    Syst Appl Microbiol; 2014 Jul; 37(5):311-9. PubMed ID: 24951450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of commercial kits for the extraction of DNA from paddy soils.
    Knauth S; Schmidt H; Tippkötter R
    Lett Appl Microbiol; 2013 Mar; 56(3):222-8. PubMed ID: 23252687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of commercial DNA extraction kits for isolation and purification of bacterial and eukaryotic DNA from PAH-contaminated soils.
    Mahmoudi N; Slater GF; Fulthorpe RR
    Can J Microbiol; 2011 Aug; 57(8):623-8. PubMed ID: 21815819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Isolation of acetic, propionic and butyric acid-forming bacteria from biogas plants.
    Cibis KG; Gneipel A; König H
    J Biotechnol; 2016 Feb; 220():51-63. PubMed ID: 26779817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Characterisation of prototype Nurmi cultures using culture-based microbiological techniques and PCR-DGGE.
    Waters SM; Murphy RA; Power RF
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2006 Aug; 110(3):268-77. PubMed ID: 16814892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of sampling techniques and different media for the enrichment and isolation of cellulolytic organisms from biogas fermenters.
    Rettenmaier R; Duerr C; Neuhaus K; Liebl W; Zverlov VV
    Syst Appl Microbiol; 2019 Jul; 42(4):481-487. PubMed ID: 31153679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Detection of cellulolytic bacteria from the human colon.
    Kopecný J; Hajer J; Mrázek J
    Folia Microbiol (Praha); 2004; 49(2):175-7. PubMed ID: 15227792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of methods for isolation of DNA for polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based identification of pathogenic bacteria from pure cultures and water samples.
    Horáková K; Mlejnková H; Mlejnek P
    Water Sci Technol; 2008; 58(5):995-9. PubMed ID: 18824796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Nonlinear electrophoresis for purification of soil DNA for metagenomics.
    Engel K; Pinnell L; Cheng J; Charles TC; Neufeld JD
    J Microbiol Methods; 2012 Jan; 88(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 22056233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An effective method for isolation of DNA from pig faeces and comparison of five different methods.
    Tang JN; Zeng ZG; Wang HN; Yang T; Zhang PJ; Li YL; Zhang AY; Fan WQ; Zhang Y; Yang X; Zhao SJ; Tian GB; Zou LK
    J Microbiol Methods; 2008 Dec; 75(3):432-6. PubMed ID: 18700153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluation of extraction and purification methods for obtaining PCR-amplifiable DNA from compost for microbial community analysis.
    LaMontagne MG; Michel FC; Holden PA; Reddy CA
    J Microbiol Methods; 2002 May; 49(3):255-64. PubMed ID: 11869790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Polymerase chain reaction with additional primers allows identification of amplified DNA and recognition of specific alleles.
    Candrian U; Höfelein C; Lüthy J
    Mol Cell Probes; 1992 Feb; 6(1):13-9. PubMed ID: 1545829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Extraction and purification of microbial DNA from petroleum-contaminated soils and detection of low numbers of toluene, octane and pesticide degraders by multiplex polymerase chain reaction and Southern analysis.
    Knaebel DB; Crawford RL
    Mol Ecol; 1995 Oct; 4(5):579-91. PubMed ID: 7582166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Improvements for comparative analysis of changes in diversity of microbial communities using internal standards in PCR-DGGE.
    Petersen DG; Dahllöf I
    FEMS Microbiol Ecol; 2005 Aug; 53(3):339-48. PubMed ID: 16329953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Comparison of the methods for extracting and purifying microbial total DNA from an aeolian sandy soil].
    Xu XJ; Cao CY; Cui ZB; Yang M
    Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao; 2010 May; 21(5):1327-33. PubMed ID: 20707121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Polymerase chain reaction amplification of naphthalene-catabolic and 16S rRNA gene sequences from indigenous sediment bacteria.
    Herrick JB; Madsen EL; Batt CA; Ghiorse WC
    Appl Environ Microbiol; 1993 Mar; 59(3):687-94. PubMed ID: 7683182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Application of denaturant gradient gel electrophoresis for the analysis of the porcine gastrointestinal microbiota.
    Simpson JM; McCracken VJ; White BA; Gaskins HR; Mackie RI
    J Microbiol Methods; 1999 Jun; 36(3):167-79. PubMed ID: 10379803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.