机构地区: 华南农业大学
出 处: 《分子植物育种》 2016年第8期2031-2035,共5页
摘 要: 植物总RNA提取的传统方法有很多种,如CTAB法,TRIzol法和SDS法。为了方便快捷的提取出高质量的植物总RNA,目前越来越多的植物总RNA提取的试剂盒被开发了出来,但不同的提取方法对不同植物组织的RNA提取效果不一。为了筛选出适合火炬松总RNA的提取方法,本研究以火炬松的韧皮部和较老的针叶为材料,比较了改良的CTAB法、Column Plant RNAout 2.0提取试剂盒、E.Z.N.A.TMPlant RNA Kit、Hi Pure Plant RNA Mini Kit、EASYspin Plus Plant RNA Kit和Mag Zol TM Reagent法提取总RNA的效果,结果表明:改良CTAB法对韧皮部和针叶均有最好的提取效果。Mag Zol TM Reagent法和EASYspin Plus Plant RNA Kit没能提取到完整的RNA,其他试剂盒的提取效果均不十分理想。 They are many traditional methods of the RNA extraction for plant tissues, such as, CTAB, TRIzol and SDS methods. In order to facilitate the researchers for extraction of the simple and quick with high-quality of RNA, more and more total RNA extraction kits of plant have been developed, however, the results have been effected by different RNA extraction methods. In order to select the suitable method for total RNA extraction form Pinus taeda L., the total RNA of Pinus taeda L. were extracted from the phloem and pine needle and compared the performances of six extraction methods, modified CTAB, Column Plant RNAout 2.0, E.Z.N.A.TMPlant RNA Kit,Hi Pure Plant RNA Mini Kit, EASYspin Plus Plant RNA Kit and Mag ZolTMReagent methods in this study. In results, modified CTAB is of high-quality and good-integrity at a high productivity. EASYspin Plus Plant RNA Kit and Mag ZolTMReagent were determined to hardly extraction integrate RNA. Other four RNA extraction kits are all didn't work well.