This study examined the influence of heat exposure on DNA samples during polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection. In this study, λDNA samples, as model DNA, were exposed to 105°C for 3–90 minutes or to 105°C–115°C for 15 minutes by autoclaving. The exposed samples were subjected to real-time PCR using nine primer sets with amplicon sizes of 45–504 bp. Regarding DNA samples exposed to 105°C by autoclaving, the data showed negative correlations between the logarithm of λDNA concentration (log λDNA) calculated using real-time PCR and exposure duration and a good relationship between the slope of the regression line and amplicon size. Regarding λDNA samples exposed to heat for 15 minutes, the data showed negative correlations between the log λDNA and exposure temperature and a good relationship between the slope of the regression line and amplicon size. These results showed that the equations used in this study could predict the degree of degradation in λDNA samples by autoclaving, and the PCR detection levels of the DNA at each amplicon size.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
JacksonCB, GallatiS, SchallerA. qPCR-based mitochondrial DNA quantification: Influence of template DNA fragmentation on accuracy. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2012; 423(3):441–447.
2.
MooreGL, MaranasCD. Modeling DNA mutation and recombination for directed evolution experiments. J Theor Biol, 2000; 205(3):483–503.
3.
GeorgiouCD, PatsoukisN, PapapostolouI. Assay for the quantification of small-sized fragmented genomic DNA. Anal Biochem, 2005; 339(2):223–230.
4.
BallariRV, MartinA. Assessment of DNA degradation induced by thermal and UV radiation processing: Implications for quantification of genetically modified organisms. Food Chem, 2013; 141(3):2130–2136.
5.
YoshimuraT, KuribaraH, MatsuokaT, et al.Applicability of the quantification of genetically modified organisms to foods processed from maize and soy. J Agric Food Chem, 2005; 53(6):2052–2059.
6.
MurraySR, ButlerRC, Timmerman-VaughanGM. Quantitative real-time PCR assays to detect DNA degradation in soy-based food products. J Sci Food Agric, 2009; 89(7):1137–1144.
7.
MurraySR, ButlerRC, HardacreAK, et al.Use of quantitative real-time PCR to estimate maize endogenous DNA degradation after cooking and extrusion or in food products. J Agric Food Chem, 2007; 55(6):2231–2239.
8.
TianF, GuanQ, WangX, et al.Influence of different processing treatments on the detectability of nucleic acid and protein targets in transgenic soybean meal. Appl Biochem Biotechnol, 2014; 172(7):3686–3700.
9.
ManoJ, NishitsujiY, KikuchiY, et al.Quantification of DNA fragmentation in processed foods using real-time PCR. Food Chem, 2017; 226:149–155.
10.
ShokereLA, HoldenMJ, JenkinsGR. Comparison of fluorometric and spectrophotometric DNA quantification for real-time quantitative PCR of degraded DNA. Food Control, 2009; 20(4):391–401.
11.
GuanQ, WangX, TengD, et al.DNA degradation of genetically modified cottonseed meal during feed processing. Appl Biochem Biotechnol, 2013; 169(2):368–379.
12.
HirdH, ChisholmJ, SanchezA, et al.Effect of heat and pressure processing on DNA fragmentation and implications for the detection of meat using a real-time polymerase chain reaction. Food Addit Contam, 2006; 23(7):645–650.
13.
ŞakalarE, AbasiyanikMF, BektikE, et al.Effect of heat processing on DNA quantification of meat species. J Food Sci, 2012; 77(9):N40–N44.
14.
DemekeT, BeecherB, EngM. Assessment of genetically engineered events in heat-treated and non-treated samples using droplet digital PCR and real-time quantitative PCR. Food Control, 2020; 115:107291.
15.
BitskinashviliK, GabriadzeI, KutateladzeT, et al.Influence of heat processing on DNA degradation and PCR-based detection of wild-type and transgenic maize. J Food Qual, 2019; 2019:Article ID 5657640.
16.
SanchizA, Sánchez-EncisoP, CuadradoC, et al.Detection of peanut allergen by real-time PCR: Looking for a suitable detection marker as affected by processing. Foods, 2021; 10(6):1421.
17.
HrnčírováZ, BergerováE, SiekelP. Effects of technological treatment on DNA degradation in selected food matrices of plant origin. J Food Nutr Res, 2008; 47(1):23–28.
18.
FattoriniP, MarrubiniG, BoninS, et al.Producing standard damaged DNA samples by heating: Pitfalls and suggestions. Anal Biochem, 2018; 549:107–112.
19.
FabreAL, LuisA, ColotteM, et al.High DNA stability in white blood cells and buffy coat lysates stored at ambient temperature under anoxic and anhydrous atmosphere. PLoS One, 2017; 12(11):e0188547.
20.
OttoniC, KoonHEC, CollinsMJ, et al.Preservation of ancient DNA in thermally damaged archaeological bone. Naturwissenschaften, 2009; 96(2):267–278.
21.
Calderón-FrancoD, LinQ, van LoosdrechtMCM, et al.Anticipating xenogenic pollution at the source: Impact of sterilizations on DNA release from microbial cultures. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2020; 8:171.
22.
SuyamaT, KawaharasakiM. Decomposition of waste DNA with extended autoclaving under unsaturated steam. BioTechniques, 2013; 55(6):296–299.
23.
MikutisG, SchmidL, StarkWJ, et al.Length-dependent DNA degradation kinetic model: Decay compensation in DNA tracer concentration measurements. AIChE J, 2019; 65(1):40–48.
24.
SedlackovaT, RepiskaG, CelecP, et al.Fragmentation of DNA affects the accuracy of the DNA quantitation by the commonly used methods. Biol Proced Online, 2013; 15(1):5.
25.
GefridesLA, PowellMC, DonleyMA, et al.UV irradiation and autoclave treatment for elimination of contaminating DNA from laboratory consumables. Forensic Sci Int Genet, 2010; 4(2):89–94.
26.
BauerT, HammesWP, HaaseNU, et al.Effect of food components and processing parameters on DNA degradation in food. Environ Biosafety Res, 2004; 3(4):215–223.
27.
Ayala-TorresS, ChenY, SvobodaT, et al.Analysis of gene-specific DNA damage and repair using quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Methods, 2000; 22(2):135–147.
28.
FernandoLP, KurianPJ, FidanM, et al.Quantitation of gene-specific DNA damage by competitive PCR. Anal Biochem, 2002; 306(2):212–221.
29.
LindahlT. Instability and decay of the primary structure of DNA. Nature, 1993; 362(6422):709–715.
30.
MarguetE, ForterreP. Protection of DNA by salts against thermodegradation at temperatures typical for hyperthermophiles. Extremophiles, 1998; 2(2):115–122.
31.
KimJ, JungJY, KwonSY, et al.Development and forensic validation of human genomic DNA quantification kit. Int J Legal Med, 2020; 134(3):963–975.
32.
ZhangL, WuQ. Single gene retrieval from thermally degraded DNA. J Biosci, 2005; 30(5):599–604.
33.
KarniM, ZidonD, PolakP, et al.Thermal degradation of DNA. DNA Cell Biol, 2013; 32(6):298–301.
34.
GrysonN. Effect of food processing on plant DNA degradation and PCR-based GMO analysis: A review. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2010; 396(6):2003–2022.
35.
DeagleBE, EvesonJP, JarmanSN. Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples—A case study on DNA in faeces. Front Zool, 2006; 3:11.
36.
ColotteM, CouallierV, TuffetS, et al.Simultaneous assessment of average fragment size and amount in minute samples of degraded DNA. Anal Biochem, 2009; 388(2):345–347.
37.
AlaeddiniR, WalshSJ, AbbasA. Forensic implications of genetic analyses from degraded DNA—A review. Forensic Sci Int Genet, 2010; 4(3):148–157.
38.
TroedssonC, SimonelliP, NägeleV, et al.Quantification of copepod gut content by differential length amplification quantitative PCR (dla-qPCR). Mar Biol, 2009; 156(3):253–259.
39.
CaldwellJM, Pérez-DíazIM, SandeepKP, et al.Mitochondrial DNA fragmentation as a molecular tool to monitor thermal processing of plant-derived, low-acid foods, and biomaterials. J Food Sci, 2015; 80(8):M1804–M1814.
40.
MaedaH, WadaS, IkeguchiM, et al.Degradation of DNA into 5'-monodeoxyribonucleotides in the presence of Mn(2+) ions. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem, 2007; 71(11):2670–2679.
41.
JasbeerK, SonR, Mohamad GhazaliF, et al.Real-time PCR evaluation of seven DNA extraction methods for the purpose of GMO analysis. Int Food Res J, 2009; 16:329–341.
42.
SchraderC, SchielkeA, EllerbroekL, et al.PCR inhibitors—Occurrence, properties and removal. J Appl Microbiol, 2012; 113(5):1014–1026.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
