Journal of Clinical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +44-1518-081136

Perspective - Journal of Clinical and Bioanalytical Chemistry (2023) Volume 7, Issue 2

Quantification of biological samples: Methods and applications in DNA, drugs, and proteins.

Sofi Tony*

Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

*Corresponding Author:
Sofi Tony
Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
E-mail: sofia@tony.uae.ca

Received: 28-Mar-2023, Manuscript No. AACBC-22-97773; Editor assigned: 29-Mar-2023, PreQC No. AACBC-22-97773(PQ); Reviewed: 13-Apr-2023, QC No. AACBC-22-97773; Revised: 18-Apr-2023, Manuscript No. AACBC-22-97773(R); Published: 24-Apr-2023, DOI:10.35841/aacbc-7.2.143

Citation: Tony S. Quantification of biological samples: Methods and applications in DNA, drugs, and proteins. J Clin Bioanal Chem. 2023;7(2):143

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Clinical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

Quantification of biological samples is crucial in various fields, including molecular biology, genetics, and pharmaceuticals. In this article, we will discuss the quantification of biological samples in DNA and drugs, including the various methods used, their advantages, and limitations. Quantification of DNA is essential in various applications, including gene expression analysis, sequencing, and genetic engineering. The most commonly used method for DNA quantification is UV spectrophotometry. This method utilizes the absorbance of DNA at 260 nm to determine the concentration of DNA in the sample. However, other substances present in the sample can also absorb light at 260 nm, leading to inaccurate quantification results. Therefore, the purity of the DNA sample should be assessed by measuring the absorbance at 260 nm and 280 nm, with a ratio of ~1.8 indicating pure DNA [1].

Another method for DNA quantification is fluorescence-based assays, such as the PicoGreen and Quant-iT assays. These assays utilize fluorescent dyes that bind specifically to DNA and emit a signal that can be detected using a fluorometer. These assays are more sensitive than UV spectrophotometry and have a lower detection limit, making them suitable for the quantification of low concentrations of DNA. However, they are also more expensive than UV spectrophotometry and require specialized equipment. In pharmaceutical research, the quantification of drug levels in biological samples is essential to determine drug efficacy, toxicity, and pharmacokinetics. The most commonly used method for drug quantification is high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). This method separates the drug from other components in the sample based on their chemical properties, allowing for the accurate quantification of the drug. HPLC is highly sensitive and specific, allowing for the detection and quantification of low concentrations of drugs in complex biological matrices. However, it also requires specialized equipment and expertise [2].

Another method for drug quantification is enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). This method utilizes specific antibodies that bind to the drug in the sample, allowing for its quantification. ELISA is highly specific and can detect low concentrations of drugs in complex biological matrices. However, it is also more expensive and time-consuming than HPLC.

Mass spectrometry-based approaches, such as liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS), are also commonly used for drug quantification. These methods utilize the detection of specific mass-to-charge ratios of the drug or its metabolites, allowing for its accurate quantification in complex biological matrices. LC-MS is highly sensitive and specific, allowing for the detection and quantification of low concentrations of drugs. However, it also requires specialized equipment and expertise, making it less accessible to some researchers. There are other methods that can be used for the quantification of biological samples in DNA and drugs. One example is the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), which is commonly used for the quantification of DNA in samples. PCR amplifies specific regions of DNA, allowing for their quantification using various methods, including gel electrophoresis and fluorescence-based assays [3].

Another method for drug quantification is capillary electrophoresis (CE). CE separates the drug from other components in the sample based on their charge and size, allowing for its accurate quantification. CE is highly sensitive and specific, allowing for the detection and quantification of low concentrations of drugs in complex biological matrices. However, it also requires specialized equipment and expertise. It is also worth mentioning that the quantification of biological samples in proteins is another important area of research. The quantification of proteins is essential in various applications, including protein expression analysis, proteomics, and drug discovery. The most commonly used method for protein quantification is the Bradford assay, which utilizes the binding of the Coomassie Brilliant Blue dye to proteins, allowing for their quantification. Other methods, such as bicinchoninic acid (BCA) assay and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), can also be used for protein quantification [4].

The quantification of biological samples in DNA and drugs is essential in various fields, including molecular biology, genetics, and pharmaceuticals. UV spectrophotometry and fluorescence-based assays are commonly used for DNA quantification, with UV spectrophotometry being the most widely used due to its ease of use and low cost. In drug quantification, HPLC is the most commonly used method due to its high sensitivity and specificity. ELISA and LC-MS are also commonly used but are more expensive and require specialized equipment and expertise. Overall, the choice of quantification method depends on the specific requirements of the application, including sensitivity, specificity, cost, and accessibility [5].

References

  1. Stachniuk A, Szmagara A, Czeczko R, et al. LC-MS/MS determination of pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables. J Environ Sci Health B. 2017;52(7):446-57.

    2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  2. Krause RT, August EM. Applicability of a carbamate insecticide multiresidue method for determining additional types of pesticides in fruits and vegetables. J AOAC. 1983;66(2):234-40.

    3. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Pang GF, Chao YZ, Liu XS, et al. Multiresidue liquid chromatographic method for simultaneous determination of pyrethroid insecticides in fruits and vegetables. J AOAC Int. 1995;78(6):1474-80.

    4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  4. Schnable PS, Ware D, Fulton RS. The B73 maize genome: Complexity, diversity, and dynamics. Sci. 2009;326(5956):1112-5.

    5. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Feuillet C, Leach JE, Rogers J. Crop genome sequencing: Lessons and rationales. Trends Plant Sci. 2011;16(2):77-88.

    6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App