DNA Extraction Methods: A Comparative Review of Techniques and Their Applications

DNA extraction is the foundational step in molecular biology, forensic analysis, clinical diagnostics, and environmental monitoring. The method chosen determines the yield, purity, and integrity of the nucleic acid obtained, which directly affects the reliability of downstream applications such as PCR, sequencing, and genotyping. This review compares the major DNA extraction techniques, including organic extraction, silica-based column methods, magnetic bead technology, and specialized approaches for challenging samples, with attention to efficiency, cost, sample compatibility, and practical laboratory decisions.

At a Glance: Method Comparison Table

Core Principles of DNA Extraction

Cell Lysis and Tissue Disruption

Successful DNA extraction requires sufficient disruption of cellular and tissue structures to release nucleic acids from the nucleus and organelles. The lysis strategy must match the sample type. Soft tissues such as blood, buccal swabs, and cultured cells require gentle detergent-based lysis, while hard tissues such as bone, teeth, and plant material demand mechanical disruption or enzymatic digestion. The DNA, RNA, and protein extraction review notes that extraction and purification of nucleic acids was historically complicated, time-consuming, and labor-intensive, but specialized methods now exist for both solution-based and column-based protocols.

For bacterial samples, the cell wall presents an additional barrier. Coagulase-negative staphylococci have a thick cell wall that is difficult to lyse, and the amount and quality of DNA obtained varies considerably depending on the extraction method used. A comparative study of four extraction techniques for these organisms found that column-based methods produced the best DNA quality with a mean A260/280 ratio of 1.95, while thermal lysis produced the highest average concentration. All four methods tested provided DNA suitable for PCR amplification, but with different yields. This demonstrates that method selection must account for the specific organism or tissue being processed.

Nuclease Inactivation

Once cells are lysed, the released DNA becomes vulnerable to degradation by nucleases present in the sample. Effective extraction protocols incorporate steps to denature or inactivate these enzymes. The nucleic acid extraction chapter from Methods in Molecular Biology emphasizes that successful extraction requires sufficient disruption of tissue and cellular structures, denaturation of nucleoprotein complexes, inactivation of nucleases, and nucleic acid purification. These steps can be modified based on the nucleic acid of interest and the biological sample source.

Chaotropic salts such as guanidine isothiocyanate and guanidine hydrochloride serve dual functions in many extraction protocols. They denature proteins including nucleases while also facilitating nucleic acid binding to silica surfaces. For RNA extraction, the challenge is more pronounced because RNases are highly stable enzymes that resist denaturation. The low-toxic RNA isolation study demonstrates that strongly protein-denaturing conditions are usually employed to quickly inactivate RNases prior to separating nucleic acids from protein, and proposes a combination of high urea concentrations with SDS as a non-volatile, low toxicity alternative to organic solvents.

Purification and Removal of Inhibitors

The final stage of extraction removes proteins, lipids, polysaccharides, and other cellular components that could interfere with downstream analysis. PCR inhibitors are a major limitation for successful DNA analysis. The PCR inhibition review explains that sample-related substances interfere with analysis by affecting in vitro DNA polymerization and fluorescence measurements. PCR inhibition affects library preparation in massively parallel sequencing, skews quantification in quantitative PCR, and some inhibitors quench the fluorescence of applied fluorophores. The classical solution to handle PCR inhibition is to purify or dilute DNA extracts, which leads to DNA loss.

The choice of purification method directly impacts inhibitor removal. Silica columns and magnetic beads generally provide better removal of inhibitors than simple precipitation methods. However, the effectiveness varies by sample type. For processed food matrices where DNA integrity may be compromised, the dairy and blood products extraction study found that a guanidine isothiocyanate magnetic bead method yielded high quantities and purity of DNA, with chicken blood samples producing 318.34 ng/µL and A260/A280 ratios ranging from 1.8 to 2.0. This method also demonstrated strong tolerance to coexisting contaminants, improving extraction performance in challenging food samples.

Organic Extraction Methods

Phenol-Chloroform Extraction

Organic extraction using phenol and chloroform is one of the oldest and most established DNA purification techniques. The method relies on the differential solubility of nucleic acids and proteins in aqueous and organic phases. When phenol is mixed with a cell lysate and centrifuged, proteins partition into the organic phase while DNA remains in the aqueous phase. Chloroform is then used to remove residual phenol from the aqueous layer.

This method produces high molecular weight DNA with excellent purity when performed carefully. It remains the method of choice for applications requiring very large DNA fragments, such as certain sequencing library preparations and genomic analysis. However, the procedure is labor-intensive, requires multiple centrifugation steps, and involves handling toxic organic solvents. The historical review of extraction methods notes that manual methods have evolved with various commercial offerings that include complete kits, but most require repeated centrifugation steps followed by removal of supernatants depending on the specimen type.

Salting Out and Isopropanol Precipitation

Salting out methods use high salt concentrations to precipitate proteins while leaving DNA in solution. The DNA is then recovered by alcohol precipitation. This approach avoids the use of toxic organic solvents and is relatively inexpensive. The mathematical modeling study of DNA yield explored an enzyme-assisted inorganic salt-based extraction protocol for peripheral whole blood samples, using Box-Behnken Design to optimize incubation temperature, time, and proteinase K concentration. The best simulation settings yielded maximum DNA at 56°C for 10 hours with 10 µL of proteinase K, producing 300 ng/µL.

SDS-isopropanol precipitation is another variation that avoids organic solvents. The dairy and blood products study compared SDS-CTAB, SDS-isopropanol precipitation, guanidine isothiocyanate magnetic beads, and a commercial kit. The SDS-isopropanol method was noted to have limitations associated with protein contamination and amplification instability, while the magnetic bead approach was free from these issues.

Silica-Based Column Methods

Principle of Chaotropic Salt Binding

Silica-based extraction methods exploit the property of DNA to bind to silica surfaces in the presence of high concentrations of chaotropic salts. Under these conditions, water molecules are stripped from the DNA backbone, exposing hydrophobic regions that interact with the silica matrix. After washing away contaminants, the DNA is eluted in a low-salt buffer or water.

Column-based methods are widely used in clinical and research laboratories because they are relatively quick, produce high-quality DNA, and are available in many commercial kit formats. The coagulase-negative staphylococci study found that the column method showed the best results for DNA quality, with a mean A260/280 ratio of 1.95, which is important because DNA quality allows the application of a large number of molecular biology techniques and storage for longer periods.

Applications and Limitations

Silica columns work well for a wide range of sample types including blood, tissue, cultured cells, and buccal swabs. They are also effective for forensic samples. The forensic DNA extraction systematic review identified over 50 different DNA extraction methodologies for hard tissue samples, with statistically significant higher DNA profiling success associated with solid-phase magnetic bead and resin methods. Incorporating a demineralisation pre-step resulted in significantly higher profiling success for bone and teeth samples.

The main limitations of silica columns are the binding capacity of the membrane, which can limit yield for large samples, and the potential for shearing high molecular weight DNA during centrifugation. For samples with very low DNA content, such as touch DNA, the touch DNA review notes that investigators can analyze samples collected at nanogram levels, requiring extraction methods that minimize DNA loss.

Magnetic Bead Technology

Mechanism and Advantages

Magnetic bead extraction uses functionalized paramagnetic particles that bind DNA reversibly under specific buffer conditions. The beads are mixed with the lysate, allowed to bind DNA, then captured using a magnetic field while contaminants are washed away. The purified DNA is eluted by changing the buffer conditions.

The systematic review of magnetic-nanoparticle-based DNA extraction documents recent developments in this technology. Magnetic bead methods offer several advantages over column-based approaches. They do not require centrifugation, making them suitable for automation. They can be scaled to handle very small or very large sample volumes. The beads can be functionalized with different surface chemistries to optimize binding for specific applications.

The dairy and blood products study found that the guanidine isothiocyanate magnetic bead method produced DNA yields 20 to 30 percent higher than commercial kits, with processing time shorter by 40 percent. Unlike SDS-CTAB protocols, this method does not require toxic reagents such as phenol or chloroform, meeting green chemistry requirements.

Automation and High-Throughput Applications

Magnetic bead technology is the foundation of most automated DNA extraction systems. The review of automated DNA extraction systems for tuberculosis detection emphasizes that robust clinical specimen nucleic acid extraction instrumentation and methods are critical to the performance of downstream molecular diagnostics. For sequencing-based technologies to be widely adopted in clinical laboratory settings in low- and middle-income countries, automated extraction technologies will be important to enhance scalability and reliability and to standardize performance of downstream assays.

The historical review of extraction methods notes that automated systems designed for medium-to-large laboratories have grown in demand over recent years. The technology should allow high throughput of samples, with maximal yield, purity, reproducibility, and scalability of biomolecules, as well as speed, accuracy, and reliability of the assay, while minimizing the risk of cross-contamination.

Specialized Extraction Methods

Chelex Resin

Chelex resin is a chelating material that binds metal ions essential for nuclease activity. When cells are boiled in a Chelex suspension, the resin protects the released DNA from degradation by metal-dependent nucleases. This method is simple, rapid, and inexpensive, making it popular for forensic reference samples and rapid screening applications.

The main limitation of Chelex extraction is that it produces single-stranded DNA with relatively low purity. The DNA is not suitable for applications requiring double-stranded template or very high purity, such as quantitative PCR or sequencing. However, for STR profiling and other PCR-based applications that tolerate some impurities, Chelex extraction can be adequate.

Direct Lysis for Field Diagnostics

Direct lysis methods involve minimal sample processing, often just heating the sample in a lysis buffer before adding it directly to the amplification reaction. These approaches are particularly valuable for field diagnostics where laboratory infrastructure is limited.

The LAMP assay study for Australian Plague Locust identification tested five DNA extraction methods for potential near-field use. The optimized LAMP assay produced amplification only from target DNA, with detection down to 0.2 picograms of DNA. The speed of application and accurate identification results enabled this scalable assay to be easily used in the field, providing positive or negative results within an hour. This capability is essential during sporadic population growth events when accurate species-level identification of substantial numbers of nymphs is critical for pest management.

Environmental DNA Extraction

Environmental DNA analysis presents unique challenges because the DNA is often degraded, present in low concentrations, and mixed with inhibitors from soil, sediment, or water. The environmental DNA metabarcoding review discusses challenges specific to sediment eDNA analysis, including the variety of different sources and states of eDNA and its persistence in the sediment. The methods and protocols utilized for sediment eDNA metabarcoding can vary considerably among studies, and standardization efforts are needed to improve their robustness, comparability, and use within regulatory frameworks.

The non-invasive amphibian DNA extraction study describes a novel protocol using water samples to extract DNA from terrestrial and semi-terrestrial amphibians. This approach immerses animals briefly, eliminating the need for tissue sampling, and yields results comparable to traditional methods. The non-invasive nature of the protocol aligns with the 3Rs principles of Replace, Reduce, and Refine.

Extraction from Hard Tissues

Bone and teeth are often the only biological materials available for identification of human remains. The forensic DNA extraction systematic review found that bone outperformed teeth in terms of profiling success, and even though dense cortical femur samples were more frequently used across studies, profiling success was comparable and in some cases higher in cancellous bone samples. The genetic identification of human skeletal remains review identifies teeth, femur, and the petrous portion of temporal bone as the main samples used for genetic analysis, with silica-based methods highlighted in the extraction protocols.

The forensic odontology review notes that dental pulp and dentin serve as reliable sources of DNA with high success rates even under adverse conditions. Short tandem repeat profiling remains the gold standard for individual identification, while mitochondrial DNA and next-generation sequencing expand applicability in degraded samples.

Method Selection Decision Framework

Sample Type Considerations

The first decision in method selection is based on the sample type and its expected DNA content. Blood samples are relatively easy to process and contain abundant DNA. Most extraction methods work well with blood, but the choice between organic extraction, columns, and magnetic beads depends on the required yield and downstream application.

Hard tissues such as bone and teeth require specialized protocols with demineralisation steps and extended digestion times. The forensic DNA extraction systematic review emphasizes that incorporating a demineralisation pre-step resulted in significantly higher profiling success. For these samples, silica-based and magnetic bead methods generally outperform organic extraction.

Processed food samples present challenges due to DNA degradation and the presence of inhibitors. The dairy and blood products study found that the magnetic bead approach was adaptable for complex matrices and demonstrated strong tolerance to coexisting contaminants.

Downstream Application Requirements

The downstream application determines the required DNA quality and quantity. Quantitative PCR requires relatively pure DNA without inhibitors that could skew quantification. Sequencing applications require high molecular weight DNA for long-read platforms or fragmented DNA for short-read platforms. Genotyping applications such as STR profiling require sufficient template but can tolerate some impurities.

The PCR inhibition review provides a deeper understanding of mechanisms of specific PCR inhibitors and how these impact specific analytical techniques. This background knowledge is necessary for analysis of samples with low amounts of template and high amounts of background material. Applying inhibitor-tolerant DNA polymerases provides a more straightforward and powerful solution than purification or dilution.

Throughput and Automation

Laboratories processing large numbers of samples should consider automated extraction systems. The review of automated DNA extraction systems notes that the ease of automatic technologies allows for faster uptake in laboratories currently without the expertise or infrastructure to perform manual extractions at the same automated throughput.

The historical review of extraction methods emphasizes that automated systems should allow high throughput of samples while maximizing yield, purity, reproducibility, and scalability, and minimizing the risk of cross-contamination.

Practical Implementation Steps

Step 1: Assess Sample Characteristics

Before selecting an extraction method, evaluate the sample type, quantity, and expected DNA content. Consider whether the sample is fresh, frozen, or fixed. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues require specialized protocols because the fixation process cross-links proteins and damages DNA. The nucleic acid extraction chapter addresses DNA and RNA extraction from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues, which are often archived in clinical pathology laboratories.

Step 2: Select Extraction Method

Use the decision framework to select the extraction method. Consider the following factors:

• Required DNA yield and purity
• Downstream application
• Sample type and expected inhibitors
• Available equipment and expertise
• Throughput requirements
• Budget constraints

Step 3: Validate the Method

Before implementing a new extraction method for routine use, validate its performance with appropriate controls. The bioanalytical method validation guidance from the FDA provides a framework for validation that can be adapted for DNA extraction methods. The Assay Guidance Manual from NCATS also provides guidance on assay development and validation.

Step 4: Establish Quality Control Procedures

Implement quality control measures to monitor extraction performance. These should include:

• Extraction blanks to monitor contamination
• Positive controls with known DNA content
• Spectrophotometric assessment of yield and purity
• Gel electrophoresis to assess DNA integrity
• Amplification controls to detect inhibitors

Step 5: Document and Monitor Performance

Maintain records of extraction performance, including yield, purity, and amplification success rates. The Laboratory Quality Management System Handbook from WHO provides guidance on quality management in laboratory settings.

Records and Measurements

Quantification Methods

DNA concentration can be measured by spectrophotometry, fluorometry, or quantitative PCR. Spectrophotometry measures absorbance at 260 nm, with A260/A280 ratios indicating protein contamination and A260/A230 ratios indicating organic solvent or salt contamination. Fluorometry using DNA-binding dyes is more specific for double-stranded DNA and is less affected by contaminants. Quantitative PCR provides the most accurate assessment of amplifiable DNA but is more expensive and time-consuming.

The coagulase-negative staphylococci study used spectrophotometry for DNA amount and quality determination, followed by agarose gel electrophoresis and PCR analysis. The column method showed the best DNA quality with a mean A260/280 ratio of 1.95.

Yield Assessment

DNA yield varies considerably depending on the sample type and extraction method. The dairy and blood products study reported yields of 318.34 ng/µL from chicken blood using the magnetic bead method. The mathematical modeling study reported yields of 300 ng/µL from peripheral whole blood using optimized enzyme-assisted salt-based extraction.

Purity Assessment

Purity is assessed by absorbance ratios and by amplification performance. A260/A280 ratios of 1.8 to 2.0 are generally considered acceptable for pure DNA. Lower ratios indicate protein contamination. A260/A230 ratios should be greater than 1.5, with lower values indicating contamination by chaotropic salts, carbohydrates, or organic solvents.

The dairy and blood products study reported A260/A280 ratios ranging from 1.8 to 2.0 for the magnetic bead method, indicating high purity.

Common Failure Patterns

Low Yield

Low DNA yield can result from incomplete cell lysis, insufficient digestion, DNA loss during purification, or poor elution. For hard tissues, inadequate demineralisation is a common cause of low yield. The forensic DNA extraction systematic review found that incorporating a demineralisation pre-step resulted in significantly higher profiling success.

For bacterial samples, incomplete cell wall digestion is a common problem. The coagulase-negative staphylococci study notes that these organisms have a thick cell wall that is difficult to lyse, and the amount and quality of DNA obtained varies considerably depending on the extraction method.

DNA Degradation

DNA degradation appears as smearing on gel electrophoresis and results in poor amplification of large fragments. Degradation can occur during sample storage, during lysis if nucleases are not inactivated quickly enough, or during purification if the DNA is exposed to conditions that promote hydrolysis.

The PCR inhibition review notes that the classical solution to handle PCR inhibition is to purify or dilute DNA extracts, which leads to DNA loss. This tradeoff between purity and yield must be managed carefully.

PCR Inhibition

PCR inhibition is indicated by failed amplification, delayed amplification, or skewed quantification. Common inhibitors include heme in blood, humic acids in soil, melanin in skin samples, and calcium in bone samples. The PCR inhibition review provides a deeper understanding of mechanisms of specific PCR inhibitors and how these impact specific analytical techniques.

Contamination

Contamination can occur from the extraction reagents, from other samples processed simultaneously, or from the laboratory environment. The Laboratory Biosafety Manual from WHO provides guidance on preventing contamination in laboratory settings. Extraction blanks should be included in every batch to monitor for reagent contamination.

Safety and Regulatory Context

Chemical Safety

Many DNA extraction methods involve hazardous chemicals. Phenol and chloroform are toxic and must be handled in a fume hood with appropriate personal protective equipment. Guanidine salts are irritants. The Laboratory Biosafety Manual from WHO provides guidance on safe handling of biological and chemical hazards in the laboratory.

The low-toxic RNA isolation study demonstrates an alternative approach using urea and SDS as non-volatile, low toxicity denaturants, avoiding the use of toxic organic solvents. This approach aligns with green chemistry principles.

Biosafety Considerations

Samples for DNA extraction may contain infectious agents. All work with human or animal samples should follow appropriate biosafety practices. The Laboratory Biosafety Manual from WHO provides comprehensive guidance on biosafety levels, containment practices, and risk assessment.

Regulatory Compliance

Laboratories performing DNA extraction for diagnostic or forensic purposes should operate under appropriate quality management systems. The Laboratory Quality Management System Handbook from WHO provides guidance on quality assurance, quality control, and continuous improvement in laboratory settings.

The bioanalytical method validation guidance from the FDA provides a framework for validating analytical methods, which can be adapted for DNA extraction procedures used in regulated applications.

Professional Escalation Criteria

Laboratory personnel should escalate issues to supervisors or quality managers when:

• Extraction blanks show contamination, indicating reagent or environmental contamination
• Positive controls fail to amplify, indicating problems with the extraction method or reagents
• DNA yields are consistently below expected ranges for the sample type
• DNA purity ratios fall outside acceptable ranges
• Amplification success rates decline despite consistent extraction procedures
• New sample types are introduced that have not been validated with the current extraction method

The Laboratory Quality Management System Handbook from WHO emphasizes the importance of documenting and investigating quality failures and implementing corrective actions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the best DNA extraction method for blood samples?

Blood samples are relatively easy to process and most extraction methods work well. Column-based methods and magnetic bead methods provide good yields and purity with relatively short processing times. The dairy and blood products study found that the guanidine isothiocyanate magnetic bead method produced high yields of 318.34 ng/µL from chicken blood with A260/A280 ratios of 1.8 to 2.0. The mathematical modeling study demonstrated that enzyme-assisted salt-based extraction can produce 300 ng/µL from peripheral whole blood when optimized. The choice between these methods depends on available equipment, throughput requirements, and downstream applications.

How do I choose between organic extraction and column-based methods?

Organic extraction with phenol and chloroform produces high molecular weight DNA and is suitable for research applications requiring very large DNA fragments. However, it is labor-intensive and involves toxic solvents. Column-based methods are faster, safer, and produce DNA suitable for most downstream applications. The historical review of extraction methods notes that manual methods have evolved with commercial kits, but most require repeated centrifugation steps. For routine diagnostic or forensic work, column-based methods are generally preferred due to their speed, safety, and consistency.

Why is my DNA yield lower than expected?

Low yield can result from incomplete cell lysis, insufficient protein digestion, DNA loss during purification steps, or poor elution. For hard tissues, inadequate demineralisation is a common cause. The forensic DNA extraction systematic review found that incorporating a demineralisation pre-step resulted in significantly higher profiling success. For bacterial samples, the coagulase-negative staphylococci study notes that thick cell walls are difficult to lyse, and the amount and quality of DNA obtained varies considerably depending on the extraction method. Review each step of your protocol to identify where DNA may be lost.

What causes PCR inhibition after DNA extraction?

PCR inhibition is caused by sample-related substances that interfere with DNA polymerization and fluorescence measurements. The PCR inhibition review explains that inhibitors affect library preparation in massively parallel sequencing, skew quantification in quantitative PCR, and some quench fluorescence. Common inhibitors include heme in blood, humic acids in soil, and calcium in bone. The classical solution is to purify or dilute DNA extracts, but this leads to DNA loss. Applying inhibitor-tolerant DNA polymerases provides a more straightforward solution.

Can I use the same extraction method for all sample types?

No single extraction method works optimally for all sample types. The coagulase-negative staphylococci study demonstrates that the amount and quality of DNA obtained by each method is highly variable and microorganism dependent. Hard tissues require demineralisation steps, processed foods require methods tolerant to contaminants, and environmental samples require specialized protocols. The environmental DNA metabarcoding review notes that methods and protocols can vary considerably among studies, and standardization efforts are needed.

How do I validate a new DNA extraction method?

Validation should include assessment of yield, purity, reproducibility, and performance in downstream applications. Include extraction blanks to monitor contamination, positive controls with known DNA content, and samples representing the range of matrices you expect to process. The bioanalytical method validation guidance from the FDA provides a framework for validation. The Assay Guidance Manual from NCATS also provides guidance on assay development and validation.

What is the role of magnetic beads in modern DNA extraction?

Magnetic beads use functionalized paramagnetic particles that bind DNA reversibly under specific buffer conditions. The systematic review of magnetic-nanoparticle-based DNA extraction documents recent developments in this technology. Magnetic bead methods do not require centrifugation, making them suitable for automation. The dairy and blood products study found that the magnetic bead method produced yields 20 to 30 percent higher than commercial kits with processing time shorter by 40 percent. The forensic DNA extraction systematic review found that solid-phase magnetic bead and resin methods were associated with statistically significant higher DNA profiling success for hard tissue samples.

How should I store extracted DNA?

DNA should be stored in a buffer that maintains stable pH, typically Tris-EDTA buffer. Storage at 4°C is suitable for short-term use, while long-term storage should be at -20°C or -80°C. Repeated freeze-thaw cycles should be avoided as they can cause DNA fragmentation. The coagulase-negative staphylococci study notes that DNA quality is important because it allows storage for a longer period of time. The nucleic acid extraction chapter discusses nucleic acid quantitation techniques and common pitfalls of extraction protocols.

Related Diagnostic Guides

• Process Controls in DNA Extraction: Monitoring Yield and Purity
• How to Calculate the Yield of a DNA Extraction
• DNA Extraction from Water Samples: Methods for Environmental DNA
• How to Interpret a Protein Purification Table: Yield, Purity, and Fold Purification
• DNA Extraction from Bacteria Using Boiling Method: Quick Protocol

References and Further Reading

• Laboratory Quality Management System Handbook. World Health Organization.
• Laboratory Biosafety Manual. World Health Organization.
• Assay Guidance Manual. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.
• Bioanalytical Method Validation Guidance. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
• NCBI Literature Resources. National Center for Biotechnology Information.
• DNA, RNA, and protein extraction: the past and the present.. Journal of biomedicine & biotechnology, 2009.
• Forensic DNA extraction methods for human hard tissue: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of technologies and sample type.. Forensic science international. Genetics, 2023.
• Nucleic Acid Extraction from Human Biological Samples.. Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2019.
• Environmental DNA metabarcoding for benthic monitoring: A review of sediment sampling and DNA extraction methods.. The Science of the total environment, 2022.
• A review on touch DNA collection, extraction, amplification, analysis and determination of phenotype.. Forensic science international, 2022.
• PCR inhibition in qPCR, dPCR and MPS-mechanisms and solutions.. Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2020.
• Review of automated DNA extraction systems for sequencing-based solutions for drug-resistant tuberculosis detection.. Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2020.
• The comet assay for DNA damage and repair: principles, applications, and limitations.. Molecular biotechnology, 2004.
• DNA Analysis in Forensic Odontology: Applications, Challenges, and Comparative Effectiveness With Morphological Identification.. 2026.
• Preliminary Comparison of a Modified cfDNA Extraction Protocol for Y-Chromosome Marker Detection in Maternal Plasma. 2026.
• Low-toxic and organic solvent-free isolation of RNA.. 2026.
• Genetic Identification of Human Skeletal Remains in Forensic Context: A Review.. 2026.
• Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay for identification of Australian Plague Locust (APL), Chortoicetes terminifera (Walker, 1870).. 2026.
• Comparison of Methods for the Isolation of Salivary Extracellular Vesicles.. 2026.
• Improved DNA Extraction for Dairy and Blood Products: A Comparative Evaluation of Yield, Purity, and PCR Compatibility.. 2026.
• EVALUATION OF FOUR DIFFERENT DNA EXTRACTION METHODS IN COAGULASE-NEGATIVE STAPHYLOCOCCI CLINICAL ISOLATES. Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de São Paulo, 2014.
• Mathematical Modeling of DNA Yield Using Box-Behnken Design for Key Extraction Parameters. Futuristic Biotechnology, 2025.
• Safe and genotyped. A non-invasive method for extraction of amphibian DNA from water baths and its application on Northern spectacled salamanders, Salamandrina perspicillata (Savi 1821). Conservation Genetics Resources, 2024.
• Improved Glass Bead-Vortex Oscillation Method for DNA Extraction from Diatom.. Fa yi xue za zhi, 2022.
• Comparison of DNA Extraction Methods from High Temperature Daqu. 2008.
• Exploring microbial diversity in volcanic environments: A review of methods in DNA extraction. Journal of Microbiological Methods, 2007.
• DNA extraction on bio-chip: history and preeminence over conventional and solid-phase extraction methods. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2017.
• Systematic Review: Recent Developments in Magnetic-Nanoparticle-Based DNA Extraction. Makara Journal of Science, 2025.

This article is educational and does not replace validated laboratory procedures, institutional biosafety review, manufacturer instructions, or professional interpretation.