Previous Article in Journal
Efficient Resource Utilization and Environmentally Safe Recovery of Platinum Group Metals from Spent Automotive Catalysts via Copper Smelting
Previous Article in Special Issue
Identification and Functional Characterization of the RcFAH12 Promoter from Castor Bean in Arabidopsis thaliana
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

Comparison of Different DNA Isolation Methods from Grapevine (Vitis vinifera) Leaves

1
Department of Viticulture and Enology, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zagreb, Svetošimunska 25, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
2
Centre of Excellence for Biodiversity and Molecular Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Separations 2025, 12(11), 316; https://doi.org/10.3390/separations12110316 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 29 September 2025 / Revised: 3 November 2025 / Accepted: 5 November 2025 / Published: 12 November 2025
(This article belongs to the Collection State of the Art in Plant Omics Analysis in Separations)

Abstract

The extraction of high-quality DNA is essential for molecular analyses in grapevine, yet differences among commonly used protocols remain underexplored. This study compared two cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB)-based methods, with and without polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), and three commercial kits (peqGOLD Plant DNA Mini Kit, Qiagen DNeasy Plant Mini Kit, and SPINeasy DNA Kit for Plant MP) using grapevine leaves and other tissues and further validated the CTAB protocol across 34 cultivars. DNA yield, purity, and integrity were assessed spectrophotometrically and by electrophoresis, while PCR suitability was confirmed for all methods. CTAB provided the highest yields and purity at low cost, with densitometry showing approximately 70–85% high-molecular-weight DNA (>20 kb). The Qiagen kit yielded reproducible results with moderate integrity (about 40–60% HMW fraction), making it suitable for high-throughput applications. The MP kit produced high concentrations but severe fragmentation (<10% HMW fraction) due to bead-beating, while the VWR kit performed worst in yield and purity. The addition of PVP improved DNA purity in polyphenol-rich tissues but reduced yield. All protocols generated DNA sufficient for PCR amplification. Overall, CTAB was robust and cost-effective across cultivars and tissues, Qiagen offered speed and reproducibility, and MP provided high concentration at the expense of integrity.
Keywords: DNA isolation; CTAB method; DNA isolation commercial kit; grapevine DNA isolation; CTAB method; DNA isolation commercial kit; grapevine

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Buljević, N.; Preiner, D.; Šikuten, I.; Tomaz, I. Comparison of Different DNA Isolation Methods from Grapevine (Vitis vinifera) Leaves. Separations 2025, 12, 316. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations12110316

AMA Style

Buljević N, Preiner D, Šikuten I, Tomaz I. Comparison of Different DNA Isolation Methods from Grapevine (Vitis vinifera) Leaves. Separations. 2025; 12(11):316. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations12110316

Chicago/Turabian Style

Buljević, Nina, Darko Preiner, Iva Šikuten, and Ivana Tomaz. 2025. "Comparison of Different DNA Isolation Methods from Grapevine (Vitis vinifera) Leaves" Separations 12, no. 11: 316. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations12110316

APA Style

Buljević, N., Preiner, D., Šikuten, I., & Tomaz, I. (2025). Comparison of Different DNA Isolation Methods from Grapevine (Vitis vinifera) Leaves. Separations, 12(11), 316. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations12110316

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop