Evaluates DNA extraction efficiency in cryopreserved bovine semen, indicating a promising method for diagnostics.
Cryopreserved bovine semen represents an accessible source of genetic material due to its widespread use in assisted reproductive technologies and the conservation of genetically valuable animals. However, DNA extraction from spermatozoa within this type of sample remains challenging due to the high protein content and the complex structure of the ejaculate, which can affect DNA yield and quality. The aim of this study was to identify and validate an efficient method for obtaining high-quality DNA from spermatozoa present in cryopreserved bovine semen for molecular diagnostic applications. Five DNA extraction protocols were evaluated: TRIzol™, MagMax™ Nucleic Acid Purification Kit, Rapid DNA™ Fecal/Soil Microbe Kit, a conventional phenol–chloroform protocol, and a modified phenol–chloroform–isoamyl alcohol protocol. All extracted genetic material was assessed by spectrophotometry (concentration and purity), and DNA integrity was evaluated by agarose gel electrophoresis. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences in DNA concentration among extraction methods (Friedman test, χ2 = 22.0, df = 4, p = 0.0002). Post hoc comparisons indicated that the modified phenol–chloroform–isoamyl alcohol protocol yielded significantly higher DNA concentrations compared to selected methods. This protocol showed the highest DNA concentration (1006.2 ± 829.4 ng/μL) and favorable purity values, and enabled consistent amplification in both conventional PCR and qPCR assays targeting the β-actin gene and Tritrichomonas foetus, respectively. These findings suggest that the modified protocol represents a suitable and promising approach for extracting genomic DNA from spermatozoa in cryopreserved bovine semen, with potential applications in molecular diagnostics and reproductive biotechnology.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ramos-Jonapá et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: