This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Liles, M. R.
Right arrow Articles by Handelsman, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Liles, M. R.
Right arrow Articles by Handelsman, J.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Liles, M. R.
Right arrow Articles by Handelsman, J.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Applied and Environmental Microbiology, May 2008, p. 3302-3305, Vol. 74, No. 10
0099-2240/08/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/AEM.02630-07
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Recovery, Purification, and Cloning of High-Molecular-Weight DNA from Soil Microorganisms{triangledown}

Mark R. Liles,1 Lynn L. Williamson,2 Jitsupang Rodbumrer,3 Vigdis Torsvik,4 Robert M. Goodman,5* and Jo Handelsman2

Department of Biological Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama,1 Department of Bacteriology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin,2 Department of Biotechnology, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand,3 Department of Microbiology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway,4 School of Environmental and Biological Sciences, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey5

Received 20 November 2007/ Accepted 12 March 2008


arrow
ABSTRACT
 
We describe here an improved method for isolating, purifying, and cloning DNA from diverse soil microbiota. Soil microorganisms were extracted from soils and embedded and lysed within an agarose plug. Nucleases that copurified with the metagenomic DNA were removed by incubating plugs with a high-salt and -formamide solution. This method was used to construct large-insert soil metagenomic libraries.


arrow
INTRODUCTION
 
Isolation of genomic DNA from soil microorganisms without cultivation (i.e., "metagenomic DNA") using harsh extraction methods results in DNA that is typically less than 100 kb in size (8, 14, 17, 20, 21, 24). For construction of a metagenomic library from a microbial assemblage, there are advantages in obtaining large contiguous genomic DNA fragments, for example, those that contain intact biosynthetic pathways or can be used to link phylogenetically informative sequences with functionally informative contiguous sequences (4, 17). Here we use an indirect DNA extraction method in which microbial cells were separated from soils (1, 5, 7, 10, 13, 22) to recover high-molecular-weight (HMW) environmental DNA for library construction (2, 9). While this method reproducibly results in isolation of HMW genomic DNA greater than 1 Mbp in size, we observed that with many soils the DNA could not be readily cloned due to the presence of contaminating nuclease activity. Therefore, we sought improvements that would achieve the removal of associated contaminants from HMW environmental DNA embedded within an agarose gel matrix and that would preserve genomic DNA integrity.

We isolated microbial cells from soils at the West Madison Agricultural Research Station (WMARS), the National Science Foundation Long-Term Ecological Research Site at Bonanza Creek Experimental Forest near Fairbanks, AK (BCEF), the Hancock Agricultural Research Station (HARS), the Curtis Prairie at the University of Wisconsin—Madison Arboretum (UW Arboretum), and the Auburn University Arboretum (AU Arboretum). These soils have diverse physical structures, with representatives of high-clay-content (WMARS and AU Arboretum), high-sand-content (HARS), and high-silt-content (BCEF and UW Arboretum) soils (3, 18, 19, 25). The bacterial cells were recovered from each soil using Waring blendor homogenization, differential centrifugation, and cell purification (2, 5, 9, 22). In some soils (WMARS, BCEF, and UW Arboretum), we could enhance the dissociation of bacterial cells from soil particles using sodium deoxycholate, polyethylene glycol, and/or an anion exchange resin (data not shown) (6, 11, 12, 23).

HMW genomic DNA was isolated using a combination of chemical and enzymatic lysis within an agarose plug (9) (Fig. 1). Briefly, extracted and washed bacterial cells were pelleted by centrifugation and embedded within low-melting-point agarose (Promega, Madison, WI) in a 1-ml syringe. The agarose plug was then extruded from the syringe and incubated in 10 ml of lysis buffer (1% Sarkosyl, 1% sodium deoxycholate, 1 mg/ml lysozyme, 10 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 0.2 M EDTA [pH 8.0], and 50 mM NaCl) for 1 h at 37°C. The plug was transferred into 40 ml of ESP buffer (1% Sarkosyl, 1 mg/ml proteinase K, and 0.5 M EDTA [pH 8.0]) and incubated for 16 h at 55°C, followed by inactivation of proteinase K with 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride from a fresh phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride stock in isopropanol with 1 h of incubation at room temperature. After three 10-min washes in 10 mM Tris-HCl with 1 mM EDTA (pH 8.0) buffer (T10E1), plugs were stored at 4°C in 10 mM Tris-HCl with 50 mM EDTA (pH 8.0). By comparison to DNA isolated by direct extraction, the DNA isolated from microbial cells was significantly larger, ranging in size from less than 20 kb to more than 1 Mb, albeit with a lower yield, ranging from approximately 10 to 25% of that achieved by direct lysis (data not shown).


Figure 1
View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIG. 1. Flow chart for the recovery, purification, and cloning of HMW metagenomic DNA from soil microorganisms.

The HMW DNA from each soil was electrophoresed from an agarose plug into CleanCut agarose (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA). Soil metagenomic DNA could be restriction digested with Sau3AI for all soils, whereas HindIII failed to restriction digest the same DNA. However, nuclease activity was observed in the control reactions that contained soil DNA and restriction buffer (containing 6 mM MgCl2) at 37°C (Fig. 2, lanes 5 and 6), with a nearly complete loss of DNA observed with some soils (AU Arboretum, BCEF, HARS, and UW Arboretum), preventing DNA cloning.


Figure 2
View larger version (101K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIG. 2. Formamide treatment of soil metagenomic DNA prevents DNA degradation. Lane 1, 1-kb DNA ladder (Promega); lane 2, MidRange II PFGE marker (New England BioLabs); lane 3, BCEF soil DNA plus formamide and salt treatment; lane 4, BCEF soil DNA plus formamide and salt treatment plus Sau3AI (10 U); lane 5, BCEF soil DNA; lane 6, BCEF soil DNA plus Sau3AI (10 U). PFGE conditions (1- to 3-s switch time) were selected to achieve compression of HMW DNA of >300 kb in order to visualize faint amounts of non-formamide-treated DNA.

Numerous methods were employed to remove nuclease contamination. For large-insert cloning, it is imperative to prevent genomic DNA shearing, and it has been reported that electrophoresis of genomic DNA through an agarose gel that includes polyvinylpyrrolidone could reduce the presence of interfering contaminants (16), but in none of the samples tested was this method effective at removing nuclease activity (data not shown).

The one method that showed a consistent and significant benefit in removing associated nucleases from metagenomic DNA was treatment with a high concentration of formamide and sodium chloride within an agarose plug (Fig. 2, lanes 3 and 4). The formamide serves to denature genomic DNA and associated proteins and other factors bound to DNA, and sodium chloride enhances genomic DNA stability during denaturation (18). The genomic DNA becomes denatured while still embedded within the agarose matrix and then may be renatured by dialysis. To accomplish this denaturation step, agarose plugs containing embedded and lysed cells were placed along the entire top of a 1% agarose gel and DNA was electrophoresed for 4 to 5 h in a cold (4°C) room. After a narrow strip of the gel was stained to determine where the DNA was present (Fig. 1), the unstained portion of agarose (with agar volume kept to a minimum) containing compressed HMW DNA was then excised and placed within a 15-ml centrifuge tube containing 80% formamide and 0.8 M NaCl in a 20 mM Tris-HCl buffer (pH 8.0), providing a 60 to 70% final formamide concentration. The plug was incubated overnight at 15°C, and then, to remove the formamide and renature DNA, the agarose plug was placed directly into a 1-liter volume of T10E1 at 4°C and the solution was very gently stirred on a magnetic plate for at least 24 h. After dialysis, the purified agarose plug was placed in a new agarose gel and metagenomic DNA was electrophoresed into low-melting-point agarose for approximately 3 h at 70 V in a cold (4°C) room. The resultant agarose plug of purified HMW DNA was immediately sliced into 4-mm sections, and each section was placed in a microcentrifuge tube containing 500 µl of T10E1 and stored at 4°C until restriction digested (within 24 h).

To subject DNA within a cell plug section to restriction digestion, between 1 and 10 units of Sau3AI were used per 4-mm cell plug section in a 200-µl volume in 1x restriction buffer and 1x bovine serum albumin for 1.5 h at 37°C. The partially digested HMW DNA was size selected using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) (0.3- to 3-s switch time, 1200, –1.5 ramping factor), and the recovered agarose slice was treated with GELase (Epicenter, Madison, WI), or it was electroeluted from the gel slice (15). In some experiments, multiple size selection gels were employed to reduce the presence of small-molecular-weight DNA in subsequent ligations. The partially digested, size-selected genomic DNA was then ligated into a commercially prepared fosmid or bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) vector at an approximate molar ratio of 10 insert:1 vector, using T4 DNA ligase overnight at 15°C. The ligation mixture was heat inactivated, dialyzed against double-distilled water, and then electroporated into highly electrocompetent Escherichia coli cells. Transformants were selected on LB media containing Cm12.5, 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-β-D-galactopyranoside, and isopropyl-β-D-thiogalactopyranoside, and white colonies were selected after 15 h of incubation.

Many parameters are important to evaluate for successful large-insert cloning. Besides purity of the HMW DNA, using a cloning vector that has been dephosphorylated to prevent self-ligation, achieving efficient recovery of the HMW DNA by electroelution, and using multiple vector:insert ratios in ligations are critical in any library construction. Each environmental sample has unique challenges, and this protocol helps to remove a critical hurdle (i.e., nuclease contamination) that may prevent large-insert cloning from many soils. While large-insert library construction is to some degree an idiosyncratic process and the specific effect of the formamide treatment has not been identified, there was clearly an increase in the efficiency of library construction when formamide (and high salt) was used to treat the recovered HMW DNA prior to restriction digestion (Table 1). In 21 library construction attempts with the BCEF soil without formamide treatment, a total of approximately 19,000 recombinant clones were obtained, and in 15 of these attempts, no genomic inserts were obtained. In contrast, in 7 library construction attempts using the formamide treatment, more than 475,000 clones were obtained, and in only 1 case were no inserts obtained (Table 1). While some of these library construction attempts were made with fosmid as well as BAC vectors, in the two cloning attempts that utilized formamide treatment and cloned this purified DNA into a BAC vector, the number of transformants obtained exceeded 80,000 clones, compared to only 19,000 BAC clones generated in 21 library attempts without using formamide treatment. Furthermore, fosmid cloning was also attempted with non-formamide-treated DNA, which did not result in any clones. In this study, there was not a concerted effort to achieve the largest insert sizes possible, since the primary concern was to first increase cloning efficiency. Presumably the increase in cloning efficiency achieved through formamide treatment would also enable more consistent larger-insert cloning; indeed, in a separate study (without negative controls that lacked formamide treatment), a soil metagenomic BAC library with an average insert size of 68 kb has been constructed (data not shown). Taken together, these results indicate that an increase in the molecular weight of metagenomic DNA can be achieved through recovery of microbial cells from soil (i.e., indirect extraction) and that contaminants that coisolate with this metagenomic DNA from some soils may be removed by treatment with a formamide and high-salt solution within an agarose plug, resulting in an increase in the efficiency of metagenomic library construction.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 1. Soil metagenomic libraries constructed with or without formamide treatment


arrow
FOOTNOTES
 
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, School of Environmental and Biological Sciences, 88 Lipman Drive, Suite 104, New Brunswick, NJ 08901. Phone: (732) 932-9000, ext. 501. Fax: (732) 932-8955. E-mail: rgoodman{at}aesop.rutgers.edu Back

{triangledown} Published ahead of print on 21 March 2008. Back


arrow
REFERENCES
 
    1
  1. Bakken, L. R., and V. Lindahl. 1995. Recovery of bacterial cells from soil, p. 9-27. In J. D. Van Elsas and J. T. Trevors (ed.), Nucleic acids in the environment: methods and applications. Springer Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
    2. 2
  2. Berry, A. E., C. Chiocchini, T. Selby, M. Sosio, and E. M. H. Wellington. 2003. Isolation of high molecular weight DNA from soil for cloning into BAC vectors. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 223:15-20.[CrossRef][Medline]
    3. 3
  3. Bintrim, S. B., T. J. Donohue, J. Handelsman, G. P. Roberts, and R. M. Goodman. 1997. Molecular phylogeny of Archaea from soil. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:277-282.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    4. 4
  4. Courtois, S., C. M. Cappellano, M. Ball, F. Francou, P. Normand, G. Helynck, A. Martinez, S. J. Kolvek, J. Hopke, M. S. Osburne, P. R. August, R. Nalin, M. Guerineau, P. Jeannin, P. Simonet, and J. Pernodet. 2003. Recombinant environmental libraries provide access to microbial diversity for drug discovery from natural products. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69:49-55.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    5. 5
  5. Faegri, A., V. L. Torsvik, and J. Goksoyr. 1977. Bacterial and fungal activities in soil: separation of bacteria and fungi by a rapid fractionated centrifugation technique. Soil Biol. Biochem. 9:105-112.[CrossRef]
    6. 6
  6. Jacobsen, C. S., and O. F. Rasmussen. 1992. Development and application of a new method to extract bacterial DNA from soil based on separation of bacteria from soil with cation-exchange resin. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 58:2458-2462.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    7. 7
  7. Kozdroj, J., and J. D. Van Elsas. 2000. Application of polymerase chain reaction-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis for comparison of direct and indirect extraction methods of soil DNA used for microbial community fingerprinting. Biol. Fertil. Soils 31:372-378.[CrossRef]
    8. 8
  8. Krsek, M., and E. M. H. Wellington. 1999. Comparison of different methods for the isolation and purification of total community DNA from soil. J. Microbiol. Methods 39:1-16.[CrossRef][Medline]
    9. 9
  9. Liles, M. R., L. L. Williamson, R. M. Goodman, and J. Handelsman. 2004. Isolation of high molecular weight genomic DNA from soil bacteria for genomic library construction, p. 839-852. In G. A. Kowalchuk, F. J. de Bruijn, I. M. Head, A. D. Akkermans, and J. D. van Elsas (ed.), Molecular microbial ecology manual, 2nd ed. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
    10. 10
  10. Lindahl, V., and L. R. Bakken. 1995. Evaluation of methods for extraction of bacteria from soil. FEMS Microb. Ecol. 16:135-142.[CrossRef]
    11. 11
  11. Macdonald, R. M. 1986. Sampling soil microfloras—optimization of density gradient centrifugation in percoll to separate microorganisms from soil suspensions. Soil Biol. Biochem. 18:407-410.[CrossRef]
    12. 12
  12. Macdonald, R. M. 1986. Sampling soil microfloras—dispersion of soil by ion-exchange and extraction of specific microorganisms from suspension by elutriation. Soil Biol. Biochem. 18:399-406.[CrossRef]
    13. 13
  13. Mayr, C., A. Winding, and N. B. Hendriksen. 1999. Community level physiological profile of soil bacteria unaffected by extraction method. J. Microbiol. Methods 36:29-33.[CrossRef][Medline]
    14. 14
  14. Miller, D. N., J. E. Bryant, E. L. Madsen, and W. C. Ghiorse. 1999. Evaluation and optimization of DNA extraction and purification procedures for soil and sediment samples. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65:4715-4724.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    15. 15
  15. Osoegawa, K., P. Y. Woon, B. Zhao, E. Frengen, M. Tateno, J. J. Catanese, and P. DeJong. 1998. An improved approach for construction of bacterial artificial chromosome libraries. Genomics 52:1-8.[CrossRef][Medline]
    16. 16
  16. Quaiser, A., T. Ochsenreiter, H. P. Klenk, A. Kletzin, A. H. Treusch, G. Meurer, J. Eck, C. W. Sensen, and C. Schleper. 2002. First insight into the genome of an uncultivated crenarchaeote from soil. Environ. Microbiol. 4:603-611.[CrossRef][Medline]
    17. 17
  17. Rondon, M. R., P. R. August, A. D. Bettermann, S. F. Brady, T. H. Grossman, M. R. Liles, K. A. Loiacono, B. A. Lynch, I. A. MacNeil, C. Minor, C. L. Tiong, M. Gilman, M. S. Osburne, J. Clardy, J. Handelsman, and R. M. Goodman. 2000. Cloning the soil metagenome: a strategy for accessing the genetic and functional diversity of uncultured microorganisms. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 66:2541-2547.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    18. 18
  18. Sambrook, J., and D. W. Russell. 2006. Isolation of high-molecular-weight DNA from mammalian cells using formamide, chapter 6.13. In Cold Spring Harbor protocols, 3rd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY. doi:10.1101/pdb.prot3225.[Free Full Text]
    19. 19
  19. Sliwinski, M. K., and R. M. Goodman. 2004. Spatial heterogeneity of crenarchaeal assemblages within mesophilic soil ecosystems as revealed by PCR-single-stranded conformation polymorphism profiling Appl. Environ Microbiol. 70(3):1811-1820.
    20. 20
  20. Steffan, R. J., J. Goksoyr, A. K. Bej, and R. M. Atlas. 1988. Recovery of DNA from soils and sediments. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 54:2908-2915.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    21. 21
  21. Tien, C. C., C. C. Chao, and W. L. Chao. 1999. Methods for DNA extraction from various soils: a comparison. J. Appl. Microbiol. 86:937-943.[CrossRef]
    22. 22
  22. Torsvik, V. 1995. Cell extraction method, p. 1-15. In A. D. L. Akkermans, J. D. van Elsas, and F. J. De Bruijn (ed.), Molecular microbial ecology manual. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
    23. 23
  23. Turpin, P. E., K. A. Maycroft, C. L. Rowlands, and E. M. H. Wellington. 1993. An ion-exchange based extraction method for the detection of salmonellas in soil. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 74:181-190.[Medline]
    24. 24
  24. Van Elsas, J. D., and K. Smalla. 1995. Extraction of microbial community DNA from soils, p. 1-11. In A. D. L. Akkermans, J. D. van Elsas, and F. J. De Bruijn (ed.), Molecular microbial ecology manual.. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
    25. 25
  25. Williamson, L. L., B. R. Borlee, P. D. Schloss, C. Guan, H. K. Allen, and J. Handelsman. 2005. Intracellular screen to identify metagenomic clones that induce or inhibit a quorum-sensing biosensor. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 71:6335-6344.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Applied and Environmental Microbiology, May 2008, p. 3302-3305, Vol. 74, No. 10
0099-2240/08/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/AEM.02630-07
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Liles, M. R., Williamson, L. L., Rodbumrer, J., Torsvik, V., Parsley, L. C., Goodman, R. M., Handelsman, J. (2009). Isolation and Cloning of High-Molecular-Weight Metagenomic DNA from Soil Microorganisms. CSH Protocols 2009: pdb.prot5271-pdb.prot5271 [Abstract] [Full Text]  

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Liles, M. R.
Right arrow Articles by Handelsman, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Liles, M. R.
Right arrow Articles by Handelsman, J.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Liles, M. R.
Right arrow Articles by Handelsman, J.

Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»