Comparison of the effectiveness of the Trizol method versus an RNA extraction kit for extracting total RNA from insect species with different tissue characteristics

doi:10.7679/j.issn.2095-1353.2020.102

Abstract

Abstract:

[Objectives] The relative efficiency of using a RNA extraction kit to extract total RNA from different insects was compared to that of the Trizol method. [Methods] An RNA extraction kit and Trizol were used to extract total RNA from five insects; Aspongopus chinensis Dallas, Sogatella furcifera Horváth, Apis cerana cerana, Pantala flavescens and Chrysolina aurichalcea. The quality and the OD value of total RNA obtained were measured with a UV spectrophotometer and agarose gel electrophoresis. [Results] Although a higher concentration of total RNA was extracted with the Trizol method from three species, S. furcifera, C. aurichalcea, and A. chinensis, it had lower purity and electrophoresis results indicated that it was degraded with poor integrity. Conversely, although the concentration of total RNA obtained with an RNA extraction kit from P. flavescens (Odonata) and A. cerana cerana (Hymenoptera) was relatively low, it was relatively pure and had better integrity. [Conclusion] The trizol method is more suitable for extracting total RNA from small insects or those with high chitin content, whereas an RNA extraction kit is better for insects with low chitin content, a soft abdomen and more body fluid.

Key words: insect RNA, extraction method, extraction efficiency, ultraviolet spectrophotometer, agarose gel electrophoresis

Zhi-Yong YIN, Jian-Jun GUO, Xu-Mei CHEN, Yu-Lin ZHENG, Ying TIAN, Jun TAN. Comparison of the effectiveness of the Trizol method versus an RNA extraction kit for extracting total RNA from insect species with different tissue characteristics[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Entomology, 2020, 57(4): 988-994.

Figures/Tables 5

References 11

[1]	Chomczynski P, Sacchi N , 1987. Single step method of RNA isolation by acid guanidinium thiocyanate-phenol-chloroform extraction. Analytical Biochemistry, 162(1):156-159. doi: 10.1006/abio.1987.9999 URL pmid: 2440339
[2]	Cox RA , 1968. The use of guanidinium chloride in the isolation of nuclei acids. Methods Enzymol., 12(part B):120-129.
[3]	Feramisco JR, Helfman DM, Smart JE , 1992. Isolation of cullar total RNA with guanidium/hot phenol method//Maniatis T (eds.). Molecular Cloning. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. 194-195.
[4]	Ge YQ, Cao LZ , 2016. Transcriptome sequencing and analysis of the head of dragonfly based on RNA-seq. Sichuan Fauna, 35(6):852-859.
	[ 葛怡情, 曹玲珍 , 2016. 基于RNA-seq的黄蜻头部转录组测序与分析. 四川动物, 35(6):852-859.]
[5]	Huang SS, Huang FK, Wu BQ, Long LP, Ling Y , 2014. Studies on biotypes of brown planthopper and white-backed planthopper in China and Vietnam. Chinese Journal of Applied Entomology, 51(2):525-533.
	[ 黄所生, 黄凤宽, 吴碧球, 龙丽萍, 凌炎 , 2014. 中国与越南褐飞虱和白背飞虱生物型研究. 应用昆虫学报, 51(2):525-533.]
[6]	Li RR, Wang B, Hu S, Li Y, Zhai YJ, Li CX, Sun QF, Ji AQ , 2018. Efficacy comparison of different RNA extraction methods. Criminal Technology, 43(6):431-435.
	[ 李冉冉, 王兵, 胡胜, 李洋, 翟永杰, 李彩霞, 孙启凡, 季安全 , 2018. 不同RNA提取方法的效能比较. 刑事技术, 43(6):431-435.]
[7]	Lü WX, Liu YS , 1987. Occurrence and control of Artemisia argyi. Chinese Grassland, ( 3):31-33.
	[ 吕文宪, 刘云生 , 1987. 蒿金叶甲的发生及其防治. 中国草原, ( 3):31-33.]
[8]	Lu YL , 2019. Analysis of current situation and protection measures of Chinese bee breeding. China Livestock and Poultry Seed Industry, 15(3):62.
	[ 卢一浪 , 2019. 中华蜜蜂养殖现状与保护措施分析. 中国畜禽种业, 15(3):62.]
[9]	Qin YR, Chen R, Wu H, Chang H, Chen GH, Wu XS, Chang GB , 2008. Expression of small and medium molecular RNA in quail blood. Chinese Poultry, 30(16):20-22.
	[ 秦玉蓉, 陈蓉, 吴海, 常洪, 陈国宏, 吴信生, 常国斌 , 2008. 鹌鹑血液中小分子RNA表达的初步研究. 中国家禽, 30(16):20-22.]
[10]	State Pharmacopoeia Commission , 2010. Pharmacopoeia of the People's Republic of China. Beijing: China Medical Science and Technology Press. 10-11.
	[ 国家药典委员会, 2010. 中华人民共和国药典. 北京: 中国医药科技出版社. 10-11.]
[11]	Zhang YP, Chen M, Zhang LL, Dai JJ, Liu J, Shu R, Fan T , 2017. Nutritional and medicinal value of economic insect resources. Journal of Agronomy, 7(10):66-71.
	[ 章玉萍, 陈明, 张丽丽, 代君君, 刘健, 舒蕊, 范涛 , 2017. 经济昆虫资源的营养与药用价值. 农学学报, 7(10):66-71.]

	Trizol法 Trizol method	RNAeasy抽提试剂盒法 RNAeasy extraction kit method
白背飞虱 Sogatella furcifera Horváth	0.001	0.001
蒿金叶甲 Chrysolina aurichalcea	0.024	0.024
黄蜻 Pantala flavescens	0.206	0.261
中华蜜蜂 Apis cerana cerana Fabricius	0.093	0.084
九香虫 Aspongopus chinensis Dallas	0.387	0.384

	Trizol法 Trizol method	RNAeasy抽提试剂盒法 RNAeasy extraction kit method
白背飞虱 Sogatella furcifera Horváth	0.001	0.001
蒿金叶甲 Chrysolina aurichalcea	0.024	0.024
黄蜻 Pantala flavescens	0.206	0.261
中华蜜蜂 Apis cerana cerana Fabricius	0.093	0.084
九香虫 Aspongopus chinensis Dallas	0.387	0.384

	白背飞虱 Sogatella furcifera	蒿金叶甲 Chrysolina aurichalcea	黄蜻 Pantala flavescens	中华蜜蜂 Apis cerana cerana	九香虫 Aspongopus chinensis
Trizol法 Trizol method	8 868.33±3 758.77^*	2 058.47±1 398.60^*	482.48±258.13	145.65±47.15	147.86±28.19
RNAeasy抽提试剂盒法 RNAeasy extraction kit method	213.33±10.14	156.11±41.22	76.30±3.28	93.33±7.56	63.16±17.32

	白背飞虱 Sogatella furcifera	蒿金叶甲 Chrysolina aurichalcea	黄蜻 Pantala flavescens	中华蜜蜂 Apis cerana cerana	九香虫 Aspongopus chinensis
Trizol法 Trizol method	8 868.33±3 758.77^*	2 058.47±1 398.60^*	482.48±258.13	145.65±47.15	147.86±28.19
RNAeasy抽提试剂盒法 RNAeasy extraction kit method	213.33±10.14	156.11±41.22	76.30±3.28	93.33±7.56	63.16±17.32

	白背飞虱 Sogatella furcifera	蒿金叶甲 Chrysolina aurichalcea	黄蜻 Pantala flavescens	中华蜜蜂 Apis cerana cerana	九香虫 Aspongopus chinensis
Trizol法Trizol method	1.54±0.02^**	1.90±0.11	1.88±0.03^**	1.68±0.01^**	1.79±0.06^**
RNAeasy抽提试剂盒法RNAeasy extraction kit method	2.02±0.04	2.19±0.01	2.15±0.003	2.09±0.01	2.06±0.01