Comparative Principles and Selection of CTAB, SDS, TRIzol, and Column-Based Purification Systems in Nucleic Acid Extraction from Plant Samples
Comparative Principles and Selection of CTAB, SDS, TRIzol, and Column-Based Purification Systems in Nucleic Acid Extraction from Plant Samples
In plant nucleic acid extraction, the main challenge usually lies not in lysis itself, but in how effectively nucleic acids can be separated from polysaccharides, polyphenols, pigments, proteins, lipids, and residual cell wall components after lysis. For leaf tissues, seeds, lignified tissues, fruit tissues, and medicinal plant samples rich in secondary metabolites, the choice of extraction system directly affects nucleic acid yield, integrity, purity, and compatibility with downstream PCR, qPCR, transcriptome library preparation, and long-read sequencing.
Keywords: plant nucleic acid extraction; CTAB; SDS; TRIzol; column purification; polysaccharides; polyphenols; RNA extraction; DNA extraction
1 Technical background of nucleic acid extraction from plant samples
1.1 Major sources of interference in plant samples
(1) The lysis barrier imposed by the cell wall
Plant cells contain cellulose, hemicellulose, pectin, and lignin outside the plasma membrane, which generally makes them more difficult to lyse than animal cells. If grinding is insufficient, even a chemically strong lysis buffer may fail to fully release nucleic acids.
(2) Co-precipitation caused by polysaccharides
Polysaccharides are among the most common contaminants in plant nucleic acid extraction. Their impact is not limited to increasing sample viscosity; they also readily co-precipitate with DNA or RNA, producing gel-like extracts that are difficult to dissolve and pipette, and that further inhibit PCR, reverse transcription, and ligation reactions.
(3) Oxidative contamination caused by polyphenols and pigments
In samples such as tea leaves, grape leaves, fruit peels, woody leaves, and rhizomes of medicinal plants, polyphenols and pigments are often abundant. After tissue disruption, these molecules are easily oxidized and can form complexes with nucleic acids or proteins, resulting in browning, reduced purity, and, in severe cases, direct amplification failure.
(4) Degradation risk caused by endogenous nucleases
Plant tissues vary greatly in RNase and DNase activity. For RNA extraction, sample collection, snap-freezing, grinding speed, and the efficiency of nuclease inactivation after lysis directly determine RNA integrity. For DNA extraction, prolonged sample handling can likewise lead to breakage and fragmentation.
1.2 Core evaluation dimensions in method comparison
(1) Lysis capacity
Whether the system can effectively disrupt the cell wall, membrane structures, and nucleic acid-protein complexes.
(2) Decontamination capacity
Whether the system can effectively control co-extracted contaminants such as polysaccharides, polyphenols, pigments, proteins, and lipids.
(3) Nucleic acid integrity
Whether the recovered DNA or RNA retains sufficient molecular length and low degradation.
(4) Operational suitability
Including procedural complexity, time cost, batch-processing capacity, and dependence on operator experience.
(5) Downstream compatibility
Including suitability for conventional PCR, real-time qPCR, restriction digestion and ligation, next-generation sequencing, third-generation long-read sequencing, and transcriptome library preparation.
Table 1. Main dimensions for comparing plant nucleic acid extraction methods
Comparison Dimension | Key Concern | Direct Impact on Results |
Lysis efficiency | Whether tissue is fully disrupted and cellular contents are completely released | Determines initial yield and reproducibility |
Polysaccharide removal capacity | Whether high viscosity or gel-like co-precipitates occur | Determines solubility and PCR compatibility |
Polyphenol removal capacity | Whether browning, pigment contamination, or oxidative complex formation occurs | Determines purity and enzymatic reaction efficiency |
Nucleic acid integrity | Whether degradation, breakage, or fragmentation occurs | Determines suitability for library preparation and long-fragment analysis |
Throughput and standardization | Whether the method is suitable for parallel batch processing | Determines routine experimental efficiency |
Downstream adaptability | Whether it meets the requirements of PCR, sequencing, and expression analysis | Determines the final method choice |
2 CTAB system
2.1 Extraction principles of the CTAB system
(1) Surfactant-mediated lysis
CTAB, cetyltrimethylammonium bromide, is a cationic surfactant. Its primary role is to disrupt the plasma membrane and nuclear membrane, releasing intracellular DNA, RNA, proteins, and polysaccharides into the lysis solution. Unlike neutral or anionic surfactants, CTAB in a high-salt environment is involved not only in lysis but also in subsequent contaminant separation.
(2) Logic of polysaccharide separation under high-salt conditions
The long-standing advantage of the CTAB method in plant samples is not due to CTAB alone, but to the separation environment formed by CTAB together with high-concentration NaCl. High salt helps reduce the tendency of polysaccharides to co-precipitate with nucleic acids, allowing DNA to separate from part of the polysaccharide fraction during subsequent precipitation. In polysaccharide-rich samples, this feature often determines whether the method succeeds.
(3) Auxiliary decontamination mechanisms of PVP and reducing agents
Plant CTAB lysis buffers often contain PVP or PVPP to adsorb polyphenols and reduce their complex formation with nucleic acids. Reducing agents such as β-mercaptoethanol or DTT are also commonly added to suppress phenolic oxidation and browning reactions. For woody plants and medicinal plants with high polyphenol content, these components are often not optional additives, but key factors for stable extraction performance.
(4) Roles of organic extraction and alcohol precipitation
After CTAB lysis, chloroform or chloroform-isoamyl alcohol extraction is usually required to remove proteins, lipids, and some pigments. DNA is then precipitated with isopropanol or ethanol. In other words, the CTAB method is not the action of a single reagent, but rather a combined system of high-salt CTAB lysis, polyphenol-control auxiliaries, organic extraction, and alcohol-based purification.
2.2 Advantages of the CTAB system
(1) Better suited to polysaccharide-rich samples
In fruit tissues, seeds, tubers, cactus-like tissues, and mucilaginous materials, polysaccharide contamination is especially problematic. The CTAB system generally controls such co-precipitation better than SDS-based methods and standard column methods.
(2) More suitable for plant genomic DNA extraction
The CTAB system is particularly well suited for plant genomic DNA extraction. When liquid nitrogen grinding is sufficient and extraction and wash steps are properly controlled, it usually yields DNA suitable for PCR, restriction digestion, and routine library preparation.
(3) Strong tunability
By adjusting the proportions of CTAB, NaCl, PVP, and reducing agents, the formulation can be optimized for different plant samples, making it broadly adaptable to complex materials.
2.3 Limitations of the CTAB system
(1) More procedural steps
The CTAB method usually involves multiple steps, including heat lysis, organic extraction, alcohol precipitation, washing, and re-dissolution. Because there are many manual handling points, inter-batch consistency can be strongly influenced by operator experience.
(2) Greater burden from organic solvents
Traditional CTAB methods usually rely on chloroform extraction. If phase separation is unclear or interface recovery is unstable, residual proteins and pigments can more easily affect purity.
(3) Not a universal first choice for RNA extraction
Although CTAB-based RNA extraction methods have been developed, CTAB is not usually the first general-choice method for plant total RNA extraction in routine work, especially when high RNA integrity is required, because optimization costs are often high.
3 SDS system
3.1 Extraction principles of the SDS system
(1) Lysis by an anionic surfactant
SDS, sodium dodecyl sulfate, is a typical anionic surfactant. Its core function is to disrupt the plasma membrane and nuclear membrane while denaturing proteins, thereby releasing nucleic acids and weakening nucleic acid-protein complexes.
(2) Protein denaturation and dissociation of complexes
Because SDS carries a strong negative charge, it binds proteins and disrupts higher-order structure, causing them to lose their native conformation. For DNA extraction, this helps release DNA from chromatin and nuclear protein complexes. For RNA extraction, SDS also contributes to protein inactivation to some extent, but its RNA-protective ability is usually inferior to that of strongly denaturing guanidinium salt systems.
(3) Subsequent decontamination relies mainly on salting-out or organic extraction
SDS itself is more effective at lysis and protein denaturation than at specifically controlling polysaccharides and polyphenols. Therefore, SDS-based methods usually need to be combined with proteinase K, salting-out, phenol/chloroform extraction, or subsequent column purification to obtain nucleic acids of adequate purity.
(4) Relatively straightforward system design
Compared with CTAB, the logic of SDS-based extraction is simpler and centers mainly on lysis, protein denaturation, and subsequent purification. This is one reason why it has remained widely used in routine DNA extraction.
3.2 Advantages of the SDS system
(1) Suitable for routine plant DNA extraction
For leaf tissues or cultured tissues that are not extremely rich in polysaccharides or polyphenols, the SDS system can conveniently support DNA extraction and is especially suitable for preparing routine PCR templates.
(2) Flexible methodology
SDS-based methods can be combined with salting-out, phenol/chloroform extraction, or column purification, allowing laboratories to flexibly assemble workflows according to sample characteristics.
(3) Relatively low cost
The SDS system usually does not depend on unusual surfactants or expensive specialized reagents and is therefore readily accessible to routine laboratories.
3.3 Limitations of the SDS system
(1) Usually weaker polysaccharide removal than CTAB
SDS is strong for lysis and protein denaturation, but its control of highly polysaccharide-rich plant samples is usually weaker than that of CTAB. If the sample itself contains abundant storage polysaccharides or mucilage, SDS-based extraction is more likely to produce co-precipitation and high-viscosity problems.
(2) Polyphenol removal depends on additional optimization
SDS itself does not provide a specific advantage against polyphenol contamination. If the sample is rich in phenolic compounds, PVP, reducing agents, or extra organic extraction steps are still required.
(3) Not always optimal for high-quality long-fragment DNA
In complex plant samples, if contaminants are not sufficiently removed, SDS-based systems are more likely to produce DNA that is amplifiable but only moderately pure. For high-molecular-weight DNA required for long-read sequencing, further optimization or a CTAB-based approach is usually preferred.
4 TRIzol system
4.1 Extraction principles of the TRIzol system
(1) Strong denaturing lysis with acidic phenol and guanidinium salts
TRIzol-type systems usually consist of acidic phenol and guanidinium salts. Guanidinium salts rapidly disrupt protein structure and strongly inactivate RNases, while acidic phenol helps govern phase separation between nucleic acids and proteins. This gives TRIzol a clear advantage in RNA preservation.
(2) Chloroform-induced phase separation mechanism
After addition of chloroform and centrifugation, the system typically separates into an upper aqueous phase, an interphase, and a lower organic phase. Under acidic conditions, RNA mainly partitions into the aqueous phase, DNA remains near the interface, and proteins are distributed mainly into the organic phase. Thus, the key strength of TRIzol is not simply strong lysis, but preferential transfer of RNA into a relatively clean aqueous phase through phase separation.
(3) RNA-prioritized recovery route
Although DNA and proteins can also be recovered from TRIzol, the methodological focus remains RNA extraction. It is best suited to the question of how to rapidly obtain total RNA while suppressing RNA degradation as early as possible.
(4) Isopropanol precipitation and subsequent washing
After RNA enters the aqueous phase, it is usually precipitated with isopropanol and then washed with ethanol to remove residual phenol and salts. If this step is not well controlled, residual phenol, guanidinium salts, or pigments may remain in the RNA preparation.
4.2 Advantages of the TRIzol system
(1) Strong RNA protection
TRIzol systems perform well in RNase inactivation and are suitable for experiments with high demands on RNA integrity, such as qRT-PCR, transcriptome library preparation, and expression profiling.
(2) Rapid establishment of a strongly denaturing environment
For fresh plant samples, TRIzol can rapidly establish a strongly denaturing environment immediately after tissue disruption, thereby reducing RNA degradation.
(3) Suitable for routine total RNA extraction
For most common leaves, callus tissues, and cultured materials, TRIzol can usually provide relatively high total RNA yield and is suitable for most PCR-grade and routine library-grade applications.
4.3 Limitations of the TRIzol system in plant samples
(1) Not always stable for polysaccharide-rich and polyphenol-rich samples
TRIzol is strongest in RNA protection and phase separation, but in plants rich in polysaccharides and polyphenols, the aqueous phase often becomes viscous, turbid, or colored, reducing RNA purity.
(2) Phase separation depends on operator experience
In plant samples, fine debris, pigments, and unclear interfaces can easily affect aqueous-phase recovery. If interface handling is unstable, RNA purity and reproducibility decline substantially.
(3) Not suitable as a primary method for high-quality plant genomic DNA
Although DNA can be recovered from TRIzol, it is usually not the first-choice primary DNA method for plant genomic DNA in terms of DNA quality, ease of operation, and long-fragment preservation.
5 Column-based purification system
5.1 Extraction principles of the column-based purification system
(1) Silica membrane adsorption mechanism
Column-based purification systems usually rely on high concentrations of chaotropic salts and alcohol to enable nucleic acids to bind to a silica membrane under specific conditions. Wash steps then remove proteins, salts, small molecules, and some pigments, after which nucleic acids are eluted with low-salt buffer or water.
(2) Separation of lysis and purification
A column system may serve either as a complete extraction method or only as a downstream purification module. In many plant samples, the column alone does not solve the full problem. Instead, a lysis buffer or traditional extraction method is first used for pretreatment, and the column is then used to improve final purity.
(3) High standardization
The greatest feature of the column-based system is its clear adsorption-wash-elution logic and modular workflow, which is well suited to batch parallel processing.
5.2 Advantages of the column-based purification system
(1) Suitable for batch and standardized experiments
When large numbers of samples must be processed simultaneously, column systems usually outperform traditional organic extraction in time control and inter-batch consistency.
(2) More compatible with PCR and routine sequencing
Nucleic acids purified by columns usually contain lower residual salt and protein levels and are therefore more suitable for direct use in PCR, qPCR, and standard library preparation workflows.
(3) More suitable for routine RNA extraction
In plant RNA extraction, column kits often use dedicated lysis buffers together with silica membranes to achieve relatively stable total RNA recovery. For plant samples of moderate complexity, their overall convenience is usually better than manual TRIzol extraction.
5.3 Limitations of the column-based purification system
(1) Not always sufficient for extremely complex samples
If plant samples are rich in polysaccharides, polyphenols, and pigments, and upstream lysis is not adequately controlled, the column alone cannot fully solve the problem. Column clogging, reduced binding efficiency, or unstable purity may result.
(2) Limited recovery of high-molecular-weight DNA
The adsorption-elution process is not always friendly to ultra-long DNA molecules. For high-molecular-weight DNA required for long-read sequencing, column systems are generally inferior to well-optimized CTAB systems.
(3) Relatively high cost
In high-throughput and long-term use, the consumable cost of column-based systems is usually higher than that of traditional methods based on self-prepared buffers.
Table 2. Core comparison of CTAB, SDS, TRIzol, and column-based purification systems
Method | Nucleic Acid Type Better Suited | Main Advantages | Main Limitations | Plant Samples Better Suited |
CTAB | Mainly genomic DNA | Strong polysaccharide removal ability; highly tunable | More steps; greater burden from organic extraction | Difficult samples rich in polysaccharides and polyphenols |
SDS | Genomic DNA | Direct lysis; lower cost; flexible workflow | Moderate polysaccharide and polyphenol removal | Routine leaf tissues and samples with relatively mild contamination backgrounds |
TRIzol | Mainly total RNA | Strong RNA protection; suitable for expression analysis | Purity control not always stable in complex plant samples | Common leaf tissues, tissue culture materials, fresh samples |
Column purification | DNA or RNA | Highly standardized; suitable for batch processing | Strong dependence on pretreatment for very complex samples | Routine samples, batch samples, PCR/qPCR applications |
6 Method selection under different application goals
6.1 Plant genomic DNA extraction
(1) Routine PCR-grade DNA
If the sample is an ordinary leaf tissue or has a relatively light contamination background, both SDS-based methods and column-based purification are usually sufficient. If the objective is limited to PCR amplification and routine restriction digestion, convenience and throughput may be prioritized.
(2) High-purity DNA
If higher purity is required and the sample background is complex, the CTAB system is usually more reliable, especially when polysaccharides and polyphenols are clearly problematic. If necessary, column purification or magnetic bead purification can be added after CTAB extraction to further improve purity.
(3) High-molecular-weight DNA
For long-read sequencing, optical mapping, or high-quality genome assembly projects, the integrity of high-molecular-weight DNA is more important than absorbance ratios alone. Under these conditions, a gently optimized CTAB system is usually preferred over a column method.
6.2 Plant total RNA extraction
(1) Routine expression analysis
For common leaf tissues and relatively fresh samples, both TRIzol systems and column-based RNA extraction systems are suitable. If the goal is qRT-PCR, purity, degradation control, and inter-batch consistency are usually the priority.
(2) RNA extraction from complex samples
For polysaccharide-rich and polyphenol-rich samples, conventional TRIzol is often not sufficiently stable. In such cases, a modified CTAB-RNA system or a plant-optimized column-based RNA kit is more appropriate.
(3) High-integrity RNA for library preparation
If the downstream goal is transcriptome sequencing, the requirements for RNA integrity and contaminant control are higher. In this context, high yield alone is insufficient, and the method best matched to the sample type should be prioritized rather than assuming TRIzol is the default choice.
6.3 Extreme plant samples
(1) Polyphenol-rich woody leaves
The CTAB system is usually preferred, and the inclusion of higher levels of PVP and reducing agents should be considered.
(2) Fruit pulp and polysaccharide-rich tissues
The CTAB system is usually superior to SDS and standard TRIzol. If necessary, higher salt concentrations and multiple rounds of organic extraction should be added.
(3) Pigment-rich tissues
Regardless of the chosen system, co-extraction of pigments must be taken seriously. TRIzol and SDS more readily retain color contamination in such samples, whereas CTAB or front-end lysis combined with column purification is usually more reliable.
Table 3. Recommended strategies under different goals
Application Goal | More Recommended Method | Main Reason |
Routine plant DNA for PCR templates | SDS or column purification | Simple operation and adequate for routine amplification |
DNA extraction from polysaccharide-rich plants | CTAB | Stronger control of polysaccharide contamination |
DNA extraction from polyphenol-rich plants | CTAB + PVP/reducing agents | Better suited for controlling oxidative contamination |
Routine plant RNA extraction | TRIzol or column-based RNA systems | Better balance of RNA protection and workflow convenience |
High-integrity RNA library preparation | Plant-optimized column systems or modified CTAB-RNA methods | Greater emphasis on balancing purity and integrity |
High-molecular-weight DNA for long-read sequencing | Optimized CTAB system | Better for maintaining long-fragment integrity |
7 Result evaluation and quality control
7.1 Effects of pretreatment on extraction results
(1) Speed of sampling and snap-freezing
Especially in RNA work, delayed handling after sampling rapidly increases degradation risk.
(2) Quality of liquid nitrogen grinding
Whether the tissue is thoroughly and uniformly ground directly determines lysis efficiency and inter-batch consistency. Large remaining particles often lead to lower yield and residual contamination.
(3) Sample input control
Increasing tissue input does not necessarily improve yield. On the contrary, excessive input can cause incomplete lysis, column clogging, or failed phase separation.
7.2 Boundaries of interpretation for purity metrics
(1) A260/280
This is usually used as a rough indicator of protein contamination, but it cannot identify all problems related to polysaccharide and phenolic contamination.
(2) A260/230
This metric is more sensitive to polysaccharides, phenolics, salts, and organic residuals. In plant samples, it often reflects true method suitability better than A260/280.
(3) Electrophoretic integrity
For DNA, obvious smearing and fragmentation should be assessed. For RNA, degradation status and band integrity should be evaluated. Spectrophotometric ratios alone cannot replace integrity assessment.
7.3 Downstream validation is more important than purity values alone
(1) PCR amplifiability
For DNA samples, whether the target fragment can be amplified consistently is often more informative than a single absorbance ratio.
(2) Reverse transcription and qPCR performance
For RNA samples, Ct stability, amplification curves, and negative-control behavior are more important than high yield alone.
(3) Library preparation compatibility
If the final sample is intended for next-generation or third-generation sequencing, extraction quality should be judged in terms of library construction success and read-length distribution, rather than only conventional spectrophotometric results.
8 Products related to nucleic acid extraction from plant samples
Table 4. Product table for plant nucleic acid extraction and purification
Product Type | Catalog No. | Name | CAS No. | Grade and Purity | Suitable Research Use/Application |
Plant Genomic DNA Extraction Kit | NuClean Plant Genomic DNA Kit | - | - | Suitable for routine plant genomic DNA extraction and for DNA preparation from common leaves and general plant tissues | |
Plant Genomic DNA Extraction Kit | Plant Genomic DNA Kit | - | - | Suitable for routine plant sample DNA extraction and PCR template preparation | |
Universal Plant Genomic DNA Extraction Kit | Universal Plant Genomic DNA Extraction Kit | - | BioReagent, for DNA and RNA applications | Suitable for routine DNA extraction from different plant tissues, with emphasis on broad applicability | |
High-Efficiency Plant Genomic DNA Extraction Kit | Plant Genomic DNA Extraction Kit | - | BioReagent, for DNA and RNA applications | Suitable for plant DNA experiments requiring high yield and extraction efficiency | |
Magnetic Bead-Based Plant Genomic DNA Extraction Kit | Magnetic Plant DNA Kit | - | BioReagent, for DNA and RNA applications | Suitable for batch extraction of plant genomic DNA and subsequent PCR and routine library preparation | |
Magnetic Bead-Based Complex Plant DNA Extraction Kit | Magnetic Bead-Based DNA Extraction Kit for Polysaccharide- and Polyphenol-Rich Plant Samples | - | BioReagent, for DNA and RNA applications | Suitable for polysaccharide-rich and polyphenol-rich plant samples; the most directly relevant strengthened DNA extraction system in this article | |
Plant RNA Extraction Kit | RNApure Plant Kit | - | - | Suitable for routine plant total RNA extraction for qRT-PCR and general expression analysis | |
Plant RNA Extraction Kit | RNApure Plant Kit（DNase I） | - | - | Suitable for plant RNA extraction workflows that require simultaneous removal of genomic DNA contamination | |
All-in-One Plant RNA Extraction Kit | OminiPlant RNA Kit (Dnase I) | - | - | Suitable for plant total RNA extraction and downstream expression analysis, with integrated RNA extraction and DNA removal | |
Ready-to-Use CTAB System | CTAB Precipitation Solution | - | BioReagent, molecular biology grade, for DNA and RNA applications | Suitable for the precipitation step in CTAB-based nucleic acid extraction and for constructing custom plant CTAB workflows | |
Ready-to-Use CTAB System | CTAB Extraction Buffer | - | BioReagent, molecular biology grade | Suitable for front-end lysis and extraction in plant DNA extraction, especially for method development with polysaccharide-rich samples | |
Ready-to-Use CTAB System | CTAB Extraction Buffer (RNase free) | - | BioReagent, molecular biology grade | Suitable for DNA extraction scenarios that require tighter control of RNA contamination and for obtaining cleaner plant DNA | |
Core CTAB Reagent | Hexadecyl trimethyl ammonium bromide（CTAB） | 57-09-0 | Molecular biology grade, ≥99% | Suitable for preparing custom CTAB-based plant DNA extraction systems; one of the most critical lysis/separation components for polysaccharide-rich samples | |
Polyphenol Removal Auxiliary Component | Polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) | 9003-39-8 | Molecular biology grade, nucleic acid hybridization tested, mol wt 360,000 | Suitable for adsorbing polyphenolic interferents during plant nucleic acid extraction, especially in woody and medicinal plant samples | |
Polyphenol Removal Auxiliary Component | Crospovidone | 25249-54-1 | USP, JP, Ph.Eur., E 1202, NF | Suitable for enhancing polyphenol adsorption in pretreatment or lysis-system optimization for complex plant samples | |
Reducing Protective Component | 2-Mercaptoethanol | 60-24-2 | UltraBio™, molecular biology grade, ≥99% (GC) | Suitable for suppressing polyphenol oxidation and browning during plant sample lysis and for protecting nucleic acid integrity | |
Strong Denaturing Component for RNA | Guanidine thiocyanate | 593-84-0 | UltraBio™, molecular biology grade, ≥99% (AT) | Suitable for constructing RNA extraction systems with rapid RNase inactivation, consistent with the logic of TRIzol/guanidinium-based methods | |
Protein Removal Auxiliary Component | Proteinase K | 39450-01-6 | EnzymoPure™, BioReagent | Suitable for protein-removal steps in plant DNA extraction to improve DNA purity | |
Post-DNA-Extraction RNA Removal Component | RNase A | 9001-99-4 | EnzymoPure™, DNase-free, protease-free, sterile, ≥90% (SDS-PAGE), 10 mg/mL | Suitable for removing RNA contamination after plant genomic DNA extraction | |
Post-RNA-Extraction DNA Removal Component | Recombinant DNase I, RNase-free | 9003-98-9 | EnzymoPure™, ≥95% (SDS-PAGE), 1 U/μl | Suitable for removing genomic DNA contamination after plant RNA extraction | |
Workspace Decontamination | RNase and DNA Remover | - | 250 mL | Suitable for nuclease decontamination of benches and tools before plant RNA extraction | |
Workspace Decontamination | RNase and DNase Away | - | BioReagent, ready-to-use | Suitable for rapid removal of nuclease contamination in RNA work environments | |
RNA Post-Purification Module | UltraBio™ RNA Clean Magnetic Beads | - | - | Suitable for cleanup after plant RNA extraction to reduce residual salts, phenol, and pigments | |
DNA Post-Purification Module | UltraBio™ Small DNA Clean Beads | - | DNase-free and RNase-free, molecular biology grade, for DNA and RNA applications | Suitable for recovery of small DNA fragments and cleanup of plant-derived DNA samples |
In plant nucleic acid extraction, there is no single universally optimal solution among CTAB, SDS, TRIzol, and column-based purification systems. CTAB is better suited to DNA extraction from complex plant samples, SDS is more suitable for routine DNA preparation from samples with lighter contamination backgrounds, TRIzol is more oriented toward rapid RNA-first extraction, and column-based purification systems offer clearer advantages in standardization and batch processing. What truly determines method choice is not the name of the system itself, but the burden of polysaccharides, polyphenols, pigments, and nucleases in the sample, together with the specific downstream requirements for purity, integrity, and molecular length.
For more related articles, please see below:
[1] The Golden Pair for Nucleic Acid Extraction: RNase A and Proteinase K