Next Article in Journal
Neosporosis in Naturally Infected Sheep Herds, a Prospective Cohort Study over Three Years
Previous Article in Journal
Hirsutonosema embarrassi n. gen. n. sp. (Phylum Microsporidia) in the Ovary of Mucket (Actinonaias ligamentina), Plain Pocketbook (Lampsilis cardium), and Fatmucket (Lampsilis siliquoidea) (Unionidae) from the Embarrass River, Wisconsin, USA
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Parasitologia
Volume 4
Issue 2
10.3390/parasitologia4020017
parasitologia-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Brief Report

Evaluation and Standardization of RNA Extractions with Quality for RNA-Seq for Balamuthia mandrillaris

by
Leobardo Daniel Gonzalez-Zuñiga
1,
Libia Zulema Rodriguez-Anaya
2,*,
Jose Reyes Gonzalez-Galaviz
2,
Abraham Cruz-Mendívil
3,
Fernando Lares-Villa
4 and
Luis Fernando Lares-Jiménez
4
1
Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias en Especialidad en Biotecnología, Departamento de Biotecnología y Ciencias Alimentarias, Instituto Tecnológico de Sonora, Ciudad Obregón 85000, Mexico
2
CONAHCYT-Instituto Tecnológico de Sonora, Ciudad Obregón 85000, Mexico
3
CONAHCYT-Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Centro Interdisciplinario de Investigación para el Desarrollo Integral Regional Unidad Sinaloa, Guasave 81000, Mexico
4
Departamento de Ciencias Agronómicas y Veterinarias, Instituto Tecnológico de Sonora, Ciudad Obregón 85000, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Parasitologia 2024, 4(2), 199-208; https://doi.org/10.3390/parasitologia4020017
Submission received: 8 May 2024 / Revised: 31 May 2024 / Accepted: 6 June 2024 / Published: 9 June 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Balamuthia mandrillaris is a free-living amoeba (FLA) that causes granulomatous amebic encephalitis (GAE) and skin lesions. Transcriptomic analysis is a powerful tool used to study B. mandrillaris pathogenic infections. However, preliminary tests of RNA extraction showed poor results, so it has become essential to standardize a protocol for high-quality RNA. The present study evaluated 11 RNA extraction protocols based on three commercial kits by making modifications to the temperature and centrifugation times, and by combining kits. Four protocols, namely Q3 (based on QIAGEN RNeasy Mini Kit, with modifications in temperature and centrifugation times), T1 (Invitrogen TRIzol Reagent), T2 (combination of TRIzol and QIAGEN modified protocols) and T3 (combination of TRIzol and PROMEGA SV Total RNA Isolation protocols), presented RNA with good integrity and purity, except for the T1 protocol, which obtained an A260/230 value below the acceptable threshold. High RNA integrity (RIN) values were obtained with the Q3 (9.8), T2 (9.2), and T3 (8.9) protocols, while the T1 protocol obtained a lower RIN value (7.1). The Q3, T2, and T3 protocols obtained high-quality RNA from B. mandrillaris based on the criteria of integrity, purity, and concentration, where the implemented modifications and combinations raised the quality; thus, their use is recommended to obtain accurate results when performing transcriptomic analysis.

1. Introduction

Free-living amoebae (FLAs) are protozoa distributed worldwide and found in different environmental sources, such as soil and water [1]. Among the FLAs that have been reported as pathogenic for humans are the genera Naegleria fowleri, Acanthamoeba spp., Balamuthia mandrillaris, Vermamoeba vermiformis and Sappinia pedata [2]. Balamuthia mandrillaris is a protozoan found primarily on soil samples, although in some cases it has been possible to isolate it from bodies of water [3]. This pathogen causes granulomatous amebic encephalitis (GAE), which affects the central nervous system (CNS), and causes skin lesions in infected people. Currently, more than 200 cases of infection by this FLA have been diagnosed around the world, with more than 100 cases reported in America [4,5]. GAE can reach a mortality rate > 95%, and although there is no 100% effective treatment, the use of certain antibiotics and antifungals combined with an early diagnosis can increase the chances of survival for the infected [6].
To study the pathogenesis of the infections caused by B. mandrillaris, transcriptomic analyses can be carried out to identify and quantify the set of transcripts in a cell at a specific stage or condition that could be involved in the development of the disease [7,8]. The information on B. mandrillaris in the transcriptomic analysis is sparse. In 2021, functional annotation was carried out on 40% of the sequences corresponding to the proteome [9], and in 2023, the functional annotation and comparative genomic analysis of this amoeba revealed potential virulence-related genes [10]. To perform transcriptomic analysis, an extraction protocol for B. mandrillaris that provides high-quality ribonucleic acid (RNA) is necessary, considering its integrity, purity, and quantity [11]. In preliminary tests, we found problems in the performance of high-quality RNA extraction using commercial kits and following the manufacturer’s instructions; these difficulties could be due to certain factors such as the B. mandrillaris cyst, which is very resistant to both physical and chemical treatments, hindering its lysis and hence the extraction of nucleic acids [12,13]. This investigation aimed to obtain RNA from B. mandrillaris that complies with the integrity, purity, and quantity parameters required for its use in RNA-Seq analysis by standardizing the extraction protocol.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. RNA Purity and Concentration

All samples were analyzed with Nanodrop 2000c equipment (Table 1), beginning with the protocols following the manufacturer’s instructions. The concentration values obtained from protocols P1 (322.78 ± 21.66 ng/µL), Q1 (284.15 ± 15.49 ng/µL) and T1 (885.9 ± 94.05 ng/µL) were acceptable, but due to non-optimal purity values, it was decided that the temperature (from 20–25 °C to 4 °C) and centrifugation time (from 1 to 3 min for PROMEGA protocols and from 15 s to 1 min for QIAGEN protocols) would be modified, and an additional precipitation step performed. It is well known that RNA is too unstable at room temperature due to its structure, and one way to prevent degradation is to work at low temperatures [14]. Ethanol precipitation is able to separate the RNA molecules from the solution, and can be used to obtain a sample with a good purity and concentration [15].
With the modifications applied, an improvement in purity was noticed; the Q3 protocol had the best performance, with an average concentration of 1454.77 ± 37.49 ng/µL, and values for the 260/280 ratio of 2.1 ± 0.01 and values for the 260/230 ratio of 2.2 ± 0.02. The T2 and T3 protocols also presented an improvement.
Although the T3 protocol concentration is lower than that of the T1 and T2 protocols, the final quantity is greater due to the difference in the elution volumes (T3: 100 µL, T1 and T2: 50 µL). The T1 protocol has a slightly higher concentration than the T2 protocol, but an improvement was demonstrated in the A260/230 ratio, and a higher RIN value (Table 2).
The RNA concentration is important for transcriptomic analysis (>2 µg). Low concentration levels affect the amount of library data available in a sequencing process, making it more likely to present amplification artifacts that could affect the interpretation of the results [16]. In RNA, absorbance at A260 primarily measures nucleic acids, indicating the RNA concentration; absorbance at A280 detects proteins; and absorbance at A230 identifies organic compounds. Also, RNA has a higher 260/280 ratio due to the ratio of Uracil (4.00) compared to that of Thymine (1.47) [17]. This is validated through spectrophotometry using the 260/280 ratio, with an optimal value above 2.0 for RNA [18], and the 260/230 ratio, with an optimal value of 2.2 [19]. Values above 2.0 for the A260/280 ratio indicate the absence of protein contamination, and values above 2.0–2.2 for the A260/230 ratio indicates the absence of solvent contamination and denote the isolation of high-quality, non-contaminated, or pure RNA [17,20].

2.2. RNA Integrity

All samples were analyzed by gel electrophoresis. Only protocols Q3 (Figure 1A), T1 (Figure 1B), T2 (Figure 1C), T3 (Figure 1D) showed good integrity based on the intensity and ratio of the 28S and 18S rRNA bands.
RNA is considered of high quality when the 28S subunit has a 2:1 ratio over the 18S subunit in gel electrophoresis [21,22,23], so T1, Q3, T2 and T3 comply with this characteristic. The RNA integrity in electrophoresis gel is evidenced by the presence of 2 kb and 4 kb bands, which indicates that the RNA is not degraded; this is a critical quality control step for experiments such as transcriptome sequencing [24].
Likewise, the decrease in the centrifugation temperature to 4 °C had a positive effect on the integrity of the modified protocols, combined with the use of DEPC water for the agarose gel preparation and electrophoresis; this is due to its inhibition of RNase activity, since in preliminary tests, electrophoresis gels were used without DEPC water, resulting in RNA degradation in all samples. RNA integrity analysis is used to determine the level of degradation that a sample presents; its evaluation is important to obtain reliable results in experiments that involve the study of the transcriptome [25].

2.3. Determination of RIN

The protocols that showed good integrity during gel electrophoresis were analyzed by chip electrophoresis using a 2100 Bioanalyzer system (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA) to obtain the RIN value (Table 2). The T1, Q3, T2, and T3 protocols obtained RIN values of 7.1, 9.8, 9.2, and 8.9, respectively. The RIN determines the RNA integrity of a sample, with values ranging from 1 to 10 (10 being the highest quality), and an RIN with a value ≥ 8 is considered to be of suitable quality. The RIN is calculated based on an electrophoretic trace with an algorithm that evaluates the ratio of ribosomal RNA (rRNA) peaks, specifically the 18S and 28S rRNA bands, which are prominent in high-quality RNA [26,27,28]. The T1 protocol exhibited an RIN of 7.1, the lowest compared to the other protocols; this may be due to the purity levels because it does not use an RNA extraction protocol that includes washing through columns.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Culture and Harvest of B. mandrillaris

Balamuthia mandrillaris ITSON (BMI) medium was used for the axenic culture of the B. mandrillaris ITSON01 strain. This medium is composed of 10 g of Bacto™ Casitone (Difco, Detroit, MI, USA) in a final volume of 500 mL of ddH2O sterilized by an autoclave, and 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum, 200 UI/mL of penicillin, and 200 μg/mL of streptomycin as antibiotics; this was alongside a complement of 34 mL of Hank 10X balanced salt solution, which is composed of the following: CaCl2 144 mg/L, MgCl2.6H2O 1000 mg/L, MgSO4.7H2O 1000 mg/L, KCl 4000 mg/L, KH2PO4 600 mg/L, NaCl 80,000 mg/L, Na2HPO4.7H2O 900 mg/L and D-glucose (Dextrose) 10,000 mg/L. [29]. For harvesting, 75 cm2 cell culture flasks with 9 mL of BMI medium and 1 mL of fetal bovine serum were incubated at 37 °C for one week. The samples were refrigerated at 4 °C for 10 min before they were resuspended (since B. mandrillaris adheres to the surface and this thermal shock seems to help to detach amoebas that have this characteristic [29,30]); this was followed by two steps of washing using phosphate-buffered saline (PBS, pH 7.4) (except in protocols employing TRIzol, where only cell harvesting was performed) and centrifugation at 4000 times gravity (×g) for 10 min.

3.2. RNA Extraction Protocols

Three different commercial kits were used to carry out the RNA extraction protocols, but due to modifications and combinations, a total of 11 protocols were evaluated: the PROMEGA SV Total RNA Isolation System, QIAGEN RNeasy Mini Kit and Invitrogen TRIzol Reagent were used, following the manufacturer’s instructions; then, the temperature and centrifugation times were modified and a precipitation step was added once the RNA was eluted.

3.2.1. PROMEGA SV Total RNA Isolation System

We performed three different protocols based on this commercial kit: the first followed the manufacturer’s instructions (P1) (Figure 2), and the second protocol (P2) followed the same methodology (Figure 2) but added a precipitation stage once the RNA was eluted, using 10% sodium acetate (3M) of the total volume of eluted RNA, and 3 volumes (total eluted RNA) of cold molecular biology-grade absolute ethanol. Samples were refrigerated at −70 °C for 24 h, and then centrifuged at 20,000× g and 4 °C for 30 min. The pellet was washed twice, with 500 μL of 75% ethanol, and centrifuged at 20,000× g for 10 min. The supernatant was removed, and the pellet was allowed to dry for 8 min. Finally, the pellet was resuspended in nuclease-free water according to the final volume required and stored at −70 °C [15]. In the last protocol (P3) (Figure 2), changes were made to the centrifugation temperature, being altered from 20–25 °C to 4 °C, and the speed was set to 14,000× g and the time set from 1 min to 3 min.

3.2.2. QIAGEN RNeasy Mini Kit

We carried out five different protocols based on the QIAGEN RNeasy Mini Kit: the first followed the manufacturer’s instructions (Q1) (Figure 3), and the second protocol (Q2) followed the same methodology but included the same additional precipitation once the RNA was eluted, as described for the P2 protocol. We made changes to the centrifugation for the third protocol (Q3) (Figure 3), changing the temperature from 20–25 °C to 4 °C and the time from 15 s to 1 min. The fourth protocol (Q4) followed the same methodology as the Q3 protocol but added a treatment with DNase I (described in the manufacturer’s instructions) (Figure 3). For the last protocol based on this kit (Q5), the same methodology used in the Q3 protocol was applied, alongside the additional precipitation described for the P2 protocol (Figure 3).

3.2.3. Invitrogen TRIzol Reagent

Three different methodologies were implemented for the RNA extractions based on the Invitrogen TRIzol Reagent kit: the first followed the manufacturer’s instructions (T1) (Figure 4); the second combined the Invitrogen TRIzol Reagent lysis procedure and the QIAGEN RNeasy Mini kit, with centrifugation and temperature modifications (T2) (Figure 5); and the third combined the Invitrogen TRIzol Reagent lysis procedure and the PROMEGA SV Total RNA Isolation System (T3) (Figure 5).

3.3. Analysis of RNA Purity, Concentration, and Integrity

All RNA samples were analyzed by spectrophotometry using Nanodrop 2000 c equipment to determine the purity and concentration. The RNA integrity was determined by agarose gel electrophoresis. The RNA integrity number (RIN) values were determined with chip electrophoresis using a 2100 Bioanalyzer system (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA).

3.4. Gel Electrophoresis

As a previous step, the following reagents were prepared:
DEPC water: 1 L of distilled water and 0.1% of the final volume of DEPC (diethyl pyrocarbonate) were homogenized, incubated at 37 °C for 2 h, and sterilized at 120 °C for 15 min.
TBE (Tris-borate-EDTA) buffer 5×, 27 g of Tris-base, 13.75 g of boric acid and 10 mL of 0.5 M EDTA (ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid) were mixed in 350 mL of DEPC water. After the contents were dissolved, the pH was adjusted to 8 using KOH beads, and the volume was adjusted to 500 mL. From this solution, a 0.5× dilution was made to prepare agarose gels and electrophoresis runs.
The agarose gels were prepared with 40 mL of TBE 0.5× and 0.4 g of agarose, and ran at 90 v for 35 min. These were visualized using a Bio-Rad Gel Doc XR + Molecular Imager transilluminator.

3.5. Chip Electrophoresis

Chip electrophoresis was performed to determine the RNA integrity and obtain the RIN, just for those protocols that showed good integrity during gel electrophoresis. The RIN was calculated using the 2100 Bioanalyzer (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA) following the chip preparation methodology provided by the manufacturer, with the Eukaryote Total RNA Nano Series II assay performed using the Agilent 2100 Expert Software program.

3.6. Statistical Analysis

Eleven RNA extraction protocols were carried out with five repetitions (n = 5), implementing different combinations and modifications based on three commercial kits; in total, 55 samples were obtained, and these were analyzed to determine the purity, concentration, and integrity. Statistical analyses were performed using Statgraphics Centurion XVI software, using one-way ANOVA and a post hoc comparison of means with the Tukey HSD test. The factors were the RNA extraction protocols, and the response variables were the RNA concentration, 260/280 and 260/230 ratios.

4. Conclusions

In conclusion, through the harvest of B. mandrillaris in cell culture bottles, a sufficient RNA concentration was obtained for the evaluation of the RNA extraction protocols based on three different commercial kits and methodologies, which allowed the performance of each to be analyzed based on the quality, integrity, and quantity of the extracted RNA, as well as those samples suitable for RNA-Seq analysis to be determined. The modifications that were made to the temperature parameters and centrifugation times, as well as the combination of protocols, positively affected the final RNA quality, maintaining the integrity and increasing the purity. The RIN is a crucial metric used to assess the integrity of RNA, and the RIN values we achieved confirm that the RNA was largely intact and free from significant degradation, making it highly suitable for downstream applications. In addition, working with the optimal conditions for the equipment and materials and using reagents such as DEPC water are important for the correct functioning of the RNA extraction protocols.
Therefore, based on the RIN values (indicating highly intact RNA samples), integrity analysis, and concentration and purity metrics, it is recommended that protocols Q3, T2, and T3 are used to obtain high-quality RNA and accurate and precise results when performing transcriptomic analysis.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.D.G.-Z. and J.R.G.-G.; methodology, L.D.G.-Z. and L.Z.R.-A.; formal analysis, L.D.G.-Z.; investigation, L.D.G.-Z., A.C.-M. and J.R.G.-G.; writing—original draft preparation, L.D.G.-Z., J.R.G.-G. and A.C.-M.; writing—review and editing, L.Z.R.-A., F.L.-V., L.F.L.-J., A.C.-M. and J.R.G.-G. supervision, L.Z.R.-A.; project administration, L.Z.R.-A.; funding acquisition, L.Z.R.-A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Ciencia de Frontera project #840834 financed by the Consejo Nacional de Humanidades, Ciencia y Tecnología (CONAHCyT), and the Programa de Fomento y Apoyo a Proyectos de Investigación (PROFAPI).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All relevant data can be found in the article.

Acknowledgments

We thank the Centro Interdisciplinario de Investigación para el Desarrollo Integral Regional (CIIDIR-IPN) Sinaloa Unit for support in performing RNA analysis. Also, we thank the Instituto Tecnológico de Sonora (ITSON) and CONAHCYT.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Schuster, F.L.; Visvesvara, G.S. Free-living amoebae as opportunistic and non-opportunistic pathogens of humans and animals. Int. J. Parasitol. 2004, 34, 1001–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Bellini, N.K.; da Fonseca, A.L.M.; Reyes-Batlle, M.; Lorenzo-Morales, J.; Rocha, O.; Thiemann, O.H. Isolation of Naegleria spp. from a brazilian water source. Pathogens 2020, 9, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Lares-Jiménez, L.F.; Booton, G.C.; Lares-Villa, F.; Velázquez-Contreras, C.A.; Fuerst, P.A. Genetic analysis among environmental strains of Balamuthia mandrillaris recovered from an artificial lagoon and from soil in Sonora, Mexico. Exp. Parasitol. 2014, 145, S57–S61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Levinson, S.; Kumar, K.K.; Wang, H.; Tayyar, R.; Dunning, M.; Toland, A.; Budvytiene, I.; Vogel, H.; Chang, A.; Banaei, N.; et al. Balamuthia mandrillaris brain infection: A rare cause of a ring-enhancing central nervous system lesion. Illustrative case. J. Neurosurg. Case Lessons 2022, 3, CASE2268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Fan, X.M.; Chen, T.W.; Yang, H.; Gao, Y.; Chen, Y. Encephalomyelomeningitis caused by Balamuthia mandrillaris: A case report and literature review. Infect. Drug Resist. 2023, 16, 727–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Spottiswoode, N.; Pet, D.; Kim, A.; Gruenberg, K.; Shah, M.; Ramachandran, A.; Laurie, M.T.; Zia, M.; Fouassier, C.; Boutros, C.L.; et al. Successful Treatment of Balamuthia mandrillaris Granulomatous Amebic Encephalitis with Nitroxoline. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2023, 29, 197–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Wang, Z.; Gerstein, M.; Snyder, M. RNA-Seq: A revolutionary tool for transcriptomics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2010, 10, 57–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Casamassimi, A.; Federico, A.; Rienzo, M.; Esposito, S.; Ciccodicola, A. Transcriptome profiling in human diseases: New advances and perspectives. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18, 1652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Phan, I.Q.; Rice, C.A.; Craig, J.; Noorai, R.E.; McDonald, J.R.; Subramanian, S.; Tillery, L.; Barrett, L.K.; Shankar, V.; Morris, J.C.; et al. The transcriptome of Balamuthia mandrillaris trophozoites for structure-guided drug design. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 21664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Otero-Ruiz, A.; Rodriguez-Anaya, L.Z.; Lares-Villa, F.; Lozano Aguirre Beltrán, L.F.; Lares-Jiménez, L.F.; Gonzalez-Galaviz, J.R.; Cruz-Mendívil, A. Functional annotation and comparative genomics analysis of Balamuthia mandrillaris reveals potential virulence-related genes. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 14318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zakaria, Z.; Umi, S.H.; Mokhtar, S.S.; Mokhtar, U.; Zaiharina, M.Z.; Aziz, A.T.A.; Hoh, B.P. An alternate method for DNA and RNA extraction from clotted blood. Genet. Mol. Res. 2013, 12, 302–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Siddiqui, R.; Ortega-Rivas, A.; Khan, N.A. Balamuthia mandrillaris resistance to hostile conditions. J. Med. Microbiol. 2008, 57, 428–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Siddiqui, R.; Khan, N.A. Balamuthia mandrillaris: Morphology, biology, and virulence. Trop. Parasitol. 2015, 5, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Jiang, Z.; Lu, Y.; Shi, M.; Li, H.; Duan, J.; Huang, J. Effects of storage temperature, storage time, and hemolysis on the RNA quality of blood specimens: A systematic quantitative assessment. Heliyon 2023, 9, e16234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Rio, D.C.; Ares, M.; Hannon, G.J.; Nilsen, T.W. Ethanol precipitation of RNA and the use of carriers. Cold Spring Harb. Protoc. 2010, 5, pdb.prot5440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Wang, L.; Felts, S.J.; Van Keulen, V.P.; Pease, L.R.; Zhang, Y. Exploring the effect of library preparation on RNA sequencing experiments. Genomics 2019, 111, 1752–1759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Ahlberg, E.; Jenmalm, M.C.; Tingö, L. Evaluation of five column-based isolation kits and their ability to extract miRNA from human milk. J. Cell Mol. Med. 2021, 25, 7973–7979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Kanani, P.; Shukla, Y.M.; Modi, A.R.; Subhash, N.; Kumar, S. Standardization of an efficient protocol for isolation of RNA from Cuminum cyminum. J. King Saud. Univ. Sci. 2019, 31, 1202–1207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Sellin Jeffries, M.K.; Kiss, A.J.; Smith, A.W.; Oris, J.T. A comparison of commercially-available automated and manual extraction kits for the isolation of total RNA from small tissue samples. BMC Biotechnol. 2014, 14, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Faraldi, M.; Mangiavini, L.; Conte, C.; Banfi, G.; Napoli, N.; Lombardi, G. A novel methodological approach to simultaneously extract high-quality total RNA and proteins from cortical and trabecular bone. Open Biol. 2022, 12, 210387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Deleo, D.M.; Pérez-Moreno, J.L.; Vázquez-Miranda, H.; Bracken-Grissom, H.D. RNA profile diversity across arthropoda: Guidelines, methodological artifacts, and expected outcomes. Biol. Methods Protoc. 2018, 3, bpy012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Navarro-Ródenas, A.; Carra, A.; Morte, A. Identification of an alternative rRNA post-transcriptional maturation of 26S rRNA in the Kingdom Fungi. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wani, U.M.; Wani, Z.A.; Koul, A.M.; Amin, A.; Shah, B.A.; Farooq, F.; Qadri, R.A. Isolation of high-quality RNA for high throughput applications from secondary metabolite-rich Crocus sativus L. BMC Res. Notes 2022, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Natsidis, P.; Schiffer, P.H.; Salvador-Martínez, I.; Telford, M.J. Computational discovery of hidden breaks in 28S ribosomal RNAs across eukaryotes and consequences for RNA Integrity Numbers. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 19477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Schroeder, A.; Mueller, O.; Stocker, S.; Salowsky, R.; Leiber, M.; Gassmann, M.; Lightfoot, S.; Menzel, W.; Granzow, M.; Ragg, T. The RIN: An RNA integrity number for assigning integrity values to RNA measurements. BMC Mol. Biol. 2006, 7, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Shah, S.G.; Rashid, M.; Verma, T.; Ludbe, M.; Khade, B.; Gera, P.B.; Gupta, S. Establishing a correlation between RIN and A260/280 along with the multivariate evaluation of factors affecting the quality of RNA in cryopreserved cancer bio-specimen. Cell Tissue Bank 2019, 20, 489–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Puchta, M.; Boczkowska, M.; Groszyk, J. Low RIN value for RNA-seq library construction from long-term stored seeds: A case study of barley seeds. Genes 2020, 11, 1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Gaafar, A.R.Z.; Al-Qurainy, F.; Alshameri, A.; Khan, S.; Nadeem, M.; Tarroum, M.; Alansi, S.; Shaikhaldein, H.O.; Salih, A.M.; Arrak, N. High RNA quality extracted from the tolerant crop Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (L.) despite possession of low RNA integrity number. Biotechnol. Biotechnol. Equip. 2021, 35, 608–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lares-Jiménez, L.F.; Gámez-Gutiérrez, R.A.; Lares-Villa, F. Novel culture medium for the axenic growth of Balamuthia mandrillaris. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2015, 82, 286–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Suleiman, R.L.; Ralston, K.S. Growth and Genetic Manipulation of Entamoeba histolytica. Curr. Protoc. 2022, 2, e327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Parasitologia 04 00017 g001
Figure 1. The 1% agarose gel of RNA extracted. (A) Q3 protocol. (B) T1 protocol. (C) T2 protocol. (D) T3 protocol. Lanes 1–5 repetitions performed for each protocol. RNA extracted from B. mandrillaris, where good integrity is observed in all protocols, based on the 2:1 ratio of the 28S and 18S subunits.
Figure 1. The 1% agarose gel of RNA extracted. (A) Q3 protocol. (B) T1 protocol. (C) T2 protocol. (D) T3 protocol. Lanes 1–5 repetitions performed for each protocol. RNA extracted from B. mandrillaris, where good integrity is observed in all protocols, based on the 2:1 ratio of the 28S and 18S subunits.
Parasitologia 04 00017 g001
Parasitologia 04 00017 g002
Figure 2. Workflow of PROMEGA SV Total RNA Isolation System extraction protocols (created with BioRender.com).
Figure 2. Workflow of PROMEGA SV Total RNA Isolation System extraction protocols (created with BioRender.com).
Parasitologia 04 00017 g002
Parasitologia 04 00017 g003
Figure 3. Workflow of the QIAGEN RNeasy Mini Kit extraction protocols (created with BioRender.com).
Figure 3. Workflow of the QIAGEN RNeasy Mini Kit extraction protocols (created with BioRender.com).
Parasitologia 04 00017 g003
Parasitologia 04 00017 g004
Figure 4. Workflow of Invitrogen TRIzol Reagent extraction protocol (created with BioRender.com).
Figure 4. Workflow of Invitrogen TRIzol Reagent extraction protocol (created with BioRender.com).
Parasitologia 04 00017 g004
Parasitologia 04 00017 g005
Figure 5. Workflow of Invitrogen TRIzol Reagent (1) combined with QIAGEN RNeasy Mini Kit (2) and PROMEGA SV Total RNA Isolation System (3) extraction protocols (created with BioRender.com).
Figure 5. Workflow of Invitrogen TRIzol Reagent (1) combined with QIAGEN RNeasy Mini Kit (2) and PROMEGA SV Total RNA Isolation System (3) extraction protocols (created with BioRender.com).
Parasitologia 04 00017 g005
Table 1. Results regarding the concentration, purity and integrity of RNA extracted with different protocols.
Table 1. Results regarding the concentration, purity and integrity of RNA extracted with different protocols.
ProtocolConcentration
(ng/µL)		Final Quantity
(µg)		A260/280A260/230Integrity (Gel Electrophoresis)
P1322.78 ± 21.66 a32.28 ± 2.162.20 ± 0.00 d1.74 ± 0.04 abcd✗
P2334.55 ± 26.94 a33.45 ± 2.622.01 ± 0.00 ab2.47 ± 0.01 de✗
P3125.00 ± 3.74 a12.50 ± 0.372.13 ± 0.00 cd1.30 ± 0.03 a✗
Q1284.15 ± 15.43 a14.21 ± 0.772.11 ± 0.02 bcd1.54 ± 0.14 abc✗
Q2380.80 ± 21.90 ab19.04 ± 1.092.11 ± 0.01 bcd2.22 ± 0.02 bcde✗
Q31454.77 ± 37.49 d72.74 ± 1.872.11 ± 0.01 bcd2.29 ± 0.02 cde✓
Q4690.08 ± 37.44 bc34.50 ± 1.872.15 ± 0.00 cd2.39 ± 0.02 de✗
Q5342.12 ± 14.08 a17.11 ± 0.702.05 ± 0.00 abc2.25 ± 0.01 cde✗
T1852.61 ± 91.04 c42.63 ± 4.701.98 ± 0.02 a1.46 ± 0.13 ab✓
T2818.25 ± 11.45 c40.91 ± 0.572.15 ± 0.00 cd2.59 ± 0.00 e✓
T3795.28 ± 31.30 c79.53 ± 3.132.22 ± 0.00 d2.40 ± 0.01 de✓
✓: Integral sample, ✗: Non-integral sample. Determined by the intensity of the RNA bands and the 2:1 ratio of the 28S subunit to the 18S subunit. Values with different letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Table 2. RNA Integrity Number (RIN) analysis of selected protocols.
Table 2. RNA Integrity Number (RIN) analysis of selected protocols.
RNA SampleRNA Integrity Number (RIN)
T17.1
Q39.8
T29.2
T38.9
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gonzalez-Zuñiga, L.D.; Rodriguez-Anaya, L.Z.; Gonzalez-Galaviz, J.R.; Cruz-Mendívil, A.; Lares-Villa, F.; Lares-Jiménez, L.F. Evaluation and Standardization of RNA Extractions with Quality for RNA-Seq for Balamuthia mandrillaris. Parasitologia 2024, 4, 199-208. https://doi.org/10.3390/parasitologia4020017

AMA Style

Gonzalez-Zuñiga LD, Rodriguez-Anaya LZ, Gonzalez-Galaviz JR, Cruz-Mendívil A, Lares-Villa F, Lares-Jiménez LF. Evaluation and Standardization of RNA Extractions with Quality for RNA-Seq for Balamuthia mandrillaris. Parasitologia. 2024; 4(2):199-208. https://doi.org/10.3390/parasitologia4020017

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gonzalez-Zuñiga, Leobardo Daniel, Libia Zulema Rodriguez-Anaya, Jose Reyes Gonzalez-Galaviz, Abraham Cruz-Mendívil, Fernando Lares-Villa, and Luis Fernando Lares-Jiménez. 2024. "Evaluation and Standardization of RNA Extractions with Quality for RNA-Seq for Balamuthia mandrillaris" Parasitologia 4, no. 2: 199-208. https://doi.org/10.3390/parasitologia4020017

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop