Pitfalls of DNA Quantification Using DNA-Binding Fluorescent Dyes and Suggested Solutions

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 11; no. 3; p. e0150528
• Main Authors: Nakayama, Yuki, Yamaguchi, Hiromi, Einaga, Naoki, Esumi, Mariko
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 03.03.2016; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Animals; Binding; Biology and Life Sciences; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - chemistry; Cloning; Comparative analysis; Deoxyribonucleic acid; Dilution; Distilled water; DNA; DNA - analysis; DNA - chemistry; DNA fragmentation; DNA sequencing; Dyes; Electrophoresis; Ethanol; Fixatives; Fluorescence; Fluorescent dyes; Fluorescent Dyes - chemistry; Fluorescent indicators; Formaldehyde; Gene expression; Gene sequencing; Genes; Genetic research; High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing; Humans; Laboratories; Liver; Liver - chemistry; Liver Neoplasms - chemistry; Measurement methods; Medicine; Methods; Organic Chemicals - chemistry; Paraffin; Paraffin Embedding; Pathology; Physical Sciences; Polymerase chain reaction; Quality assessment; Quality control; Rats; Rats, Long-Evans; Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction - standards; Research and Analysis Methods; Ribonucleic acid; RNA; Salts; Single-stranded DNA; Sodium chloride; Solutions; Spectrum analysis; Tissue Fixation; Tissues; Trends
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150528

The Qubit fluorometer is a DNA quantification device based on the fluorescence intensity of fluorescent dye binding to double-stranded DNA (dsDNA). Qubit is generally considered useful for checking DNA quality before next-generation sequencing because it measures intact dsDNA. To examine the most accurate and suitable methods for quantifying DNA for quality assessment, we compared three quantification methods: NanoDrop, which measures UV absorbance; Qubit; and quantitative PCR (qPCR), which measures the abundance of a target gene. For the comparison, we used three types of DNA: 1) DNA extracted from fresh frozen liver tissues (Frozen-DNA); 2) DNA extracted from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded liver tissues comparable to those used for Frozen-DNA (FFPE-DNA); and 3) DNA extracted from the remaining fractions after RNA extraction with Trizol reagent (Trizol-DNA). These DNAs were serially diluted with distilled water and measured using three quantification methods. For Frozen-DNA, the Qubit values were not proportional to the dilution ratio, in contrast with the NanoDrop and qPCR values. This non-proportional decrease in Qubit values was dependent on a lower salt concentration, and over 1 mM NaCl in the DNA solution was required for the Qubit measurement. For FFPE-DNA, the Qubit values were proportional to the dilution ratio and were lower than the NanoDrop values. However, electrophoresis revealed that qPCR reflected the degree of DNA fragmentation more accurately than Qubit. Thus, qPCR is superior to Qubit for checking the quality of FFPE-DNA. For Trizol-DNA, the Qubit values were proportional to the dilution ratio and were consistently lower than the NanoDrop values, similar to FFPE-DNA. However, the qPCR values were higher than the NanoDrop values. Electrophoresis with SYBR Green I and single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) quantification demonstrated that Trizol-DNA consisted mostly of non-fragmented ssDNA. Therefore, Qubit is not always the most accurate method for quantifying DNA available for PCR.