Access Automation Scripts
For the detection of microorganisms from soil samples
For research use only and NOT intended for in vitro diagnostics.
Soil DNA Isolation Kits
For the detection of microorganisms from soil samples
Register today to receive an exclusive 15% off* on your first order.
Features and Benefits
- Rapid and convenient methods to detect microorganisms in soil samples
- Remove organic substances including humic acid using the OSR (Organic Substance Removal) Solution
- Isolate high quality total DNA from a variety of microorganisms including bacteria, fungi and algae
- Available in a variety of formats
These kits provide convenient and rapid methods for the detection of microorganisms from soil samples. All types of soil samples can be processed, including common soil samples and difficult soil samples with high humic acid content such as compost and manure. All traces of humic acid and PCR inhibitors are removed using the provided the OSR (Organic Substance Removal) Solution. Total genomic DNA can be isolated and purified from all the various microorganisms found in soil, such as bacteria, fungi and algae. The purified DNA is of the highest quality and is fully compatible with downstream PCR applications, as all humic acid substances and PCR inhibitors are removed during the isolation.
Details
Supporting Data
Figure 1. Consistent Yield of High Quality of Soil DNA.
Total soil DNA was isolated from gardening top soil samples using Norgen's Soil DNA Isolation 96-Well Kit. For analysis, 10 µL from each 100 µL elution from 10 different wells was run on a 1.2% TAE agarose gel. Lane M is Norgen's High Ranger DNA ladder.
Figure 2. Consistent and high DNA quality.
Total DNA was isolated from gardening top soil using Norgen's Soil DNA Isolation 96-Well Kit. For analysis of DNA quality, 3 µL from each 100 µL elution was used as the template in a real-time PCR reaction (SYBR Green) for the detection of the 16s rDNA. All DNA template from different wells showed a consistent Ct, indicating the consistent high DNA quality and yield. Black circle: NTC.
Figure 3. Resolution of DNA isolated from two different types of soil samples.
DNA was isolated from high humic acid soil (top soil) and regular soil (clay) using Norgen’s column-based Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Red C) and Norgen's Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Magnetic Bead System) (Mag Bead). For evaluation, 10 µL from the 75 µL elution was run on 1X TAE 1.2% agarose gel. Excellent DNA integrity and yield were observed from the Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Magnetic Bead System), indicating the robust performance comparable to the column based method. Marker = Norgen’s HighRanger DNA Ladder.
Figure 4. Two of Norgen’s soil DNA isolation methods (Column vs Magnetic Bead System) were compared for DNA concentration.
All DNA elutions isolated using Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Magnetic Bead System) [A to E] showed a comparable DNA concentration to Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Column Method; Cat. 26500), indicating the consistent and robust performance of the Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Magnetic Bead System).
Figure 5. High soil DNA quality was confirmed by real-time PCR using 8 µL of soil DNA (total PCR reaction volume was 20 µL) isolated using Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Magnetic Bead System) to detect 16s rDNA.
PCR results from Norgen's Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Magnetic Bead System) (circle) were comparable to Norgen’s column based Soil DNA Isolation Kit (cross) and showed the successful 16s rDNA detection without PCR inhibition, indicating the excellent soil DNA quality using Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Magnetic Bead System).
Figure 6. Hierarchical Clustering Dendrogram.
High quality of soil DNA was successfully isolated from the 5 challenging soil types using Norgen's Soil DNA Isolation Kits (A: Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Magnetic Bead System) and B: Soil DNA Isolation Kit Spin Column) respectively. The Hierarchical Clustering Dendrogram is based on genus-level classifications and shows the relative abundance of its genus-level classifications among soil types.
Figure 7. Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) generated by Illumina MiSeq.
Principal Coordinate Analysis of 20 samples (25-28: Mulch, 29-32: Clay, 33-36: Potting soil, 76-78: Top soil, 79-82: Compost) showing differences in the distribution of taxonomic classifications between samples up to species level. Each soil type is clearly clustered together and away from other types.
Figure 8. Resolution of DNA Isolated from Top Soil.
DNA was isolated from high humic acid soil (top soil) using Norgen's Soil DNA Isolation 96-Well Kit (Magnetic Bead System). For evaluation, 10 µL from the 75 µL elution was run on 1X TAE 1.2% agarose gel. Excellent DNA integrity, consistency and yield were observed from the Soil DNA Isolation 96-Well Kit (Magnetic Bead System). Marker = Norgen’s HighRanger DNA Ladder (Cat. 11900).
Figure 9. High Soil DNA Quality Was Confirmed By Real-time PCR Using 2 µL of Soil DNA (Total PCR Reaction Volume Was 20 µL) Isolated Using Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation 96-Well Kit (Magnetic Bead System) to Detect 16s rRNA.
PCR results from Norgen's Soil DNA Isolation 96-Well Kit (Magnetic Bead System) showed the successful 16s rRNA detection without PCR inhibition, indicating the excellent soil DNA quality using Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation 96-Well Kit (Magnetic Bead System).
Figure 10. Comparison of automated DNA extraction platforms for soil samples using the Soil DNA Isolation Kit (Magnetic Bead System) (Cat. 58100).
DNA was extracted from 250 mg of soil on two automated platforms: Isopure 96 and KingFisher Flex. The bar graph (left) shows average Cq values from 16S rRNA gene qPCR, with Isopure averaging 17.64 and KingFisher averaging 17.94, indicating comparable amplification efficiency. Error bars represent standard deviation (n = 4). The gel image (right) shows 10 µL of eluate from each prep loaded onto a 1% agarose gel (1X TAE buffer). The Norgen UltraRanger 1 kb DNA Ladder (Cat. 12100) was loaded in the first lane. High molecular weight DNA was visible across all samples, with similar band intensity between platforms, suggesting consistent yield and quality of extracted DNA.
Figure 11. Resolution of DNA isolated from 10 g of two different soil types; regular soil (clay) and high humic acid soil (top soil) using Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Maxi Kit.
For evaluation, 10 µL from the 1st elution (2 mL) and 2nd elution (2 mL) from each soil sample was run on 1X TAE 1.2% agarose gel. Excellent DNA integrity and yield were observed from the Soil DNA Isolation Maxi Kit. Marker = Norgen’s HighRanger DNA Ladder (Cat. 11900)
Figure 12. Difference in DNA yield between two soil types (clay and top soil) and elutions (1st and 2nd elution).
Ten grams of soil was processed using Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Maxi Kit. The second elution increased the total DNA yield by an additional 20-30%.
Figure 13. High soil DNA quality was confirmed by real-time PCR using 8 µL of soil DNA (total PCR reaction volume was 20 µL) isolated using Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Maxi Kit to detect 16s rDNA.
The 16s rRNA gene was successfully amplified in both the first elution (red) and second elution (blue) from two soil types (Clay = circle, Top soil = diamond) without PCR inhibition, indicating the excellent soil DNA quality from 10 grams of soil.
Figure 14. Comparison of DNA Yield from Top Soil and Clay Samples.
Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Plus Kit (Cat. 64000) and Competitor M’s kit were used to isolate DNA from 250 mg of top soil and clay samples. Following isolation, 10 µL from each 100 µL elution was loaded on 1% TAE agarose gel. Lane M: Norgen's HighRanger 1kb DNA Ladder.
Figure 15. Comparison of DNA Concentration Isolated from Top Soil and Clay Samples.
Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Plus Kit (Cat. 64000) and Competitor M’s kit were used to isolate DNA from 250 mg top soil and clay samples. Norgen’s kit showed higher DNA concentrations for both samples in comparison to the competitor kit.
Figure 16. High Quality DNA confirmed by Real-time PCR.
Soil DNA was isolated from 250 mg of clay (containing low humic acids) and top soil (containing high humic acids) samples using Norgen's Soil DNA Isolation Plus Kit and Competitor M's Kit. DNA quality was confirmed by Real-time PCR using 4 µL of soil DNA (total PCR reaction volume was 20 µL) to detect 16s rDNA from different soil samples. The earlier Ct value with Norgen's DNA samples (red lines) compared to Competitor M's samples (green lines) indicated a higher quality of soil DNA for downstream applications.
Figure 17. Microbial profiles from soil samples (clay and top soil) isolated using Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Plus Kit (Cat. 64000) and Competitor M's kit.
The relative abundance of phylum-level classifications indicates the efficiency of DNA isolation and the quality of DNA. 16S rRNA genes (v3-4 region) were amplified and the amplicons were sequenced on Illumina® MiSeq™ (MiSeq Reagent Kit v3) using Norgen’s 16S Metagenomic workflow with Illumina 16S Metagenomics Pipeline (v1.0.1).
Figure 18. Abundance of bacterial genera heat map based on phylum level between two DNA soil samples isolation methods.
Norgen’s Soil DNA Isolation Plus Kit (Cat. 64000) and Competitor M's kit. The numbers indicate species count.
| Kit Specifications | |
| Maximum Soil Input | 0.25 g of all soil types |
| Average Yield from 0.25 mL of Soil* | 1–5 μg |
| Average Purity (OD260/280) | 1.7–1.9 |
| Time to Complete 96 Purifications (automated) | 30 minutes (hands-on-time) |
| Time to Complete 96 Purifications (manual) | 90 minutes (hands-on-time) |
* Average DNA yields will vary depending upon soil sample types
Storage Conditions and Product Stability
All solutions should be kept tightly sealed and stored at room temperature. This kit is stable for 1 year after the date of shipment.
| Component | Cat. 26560 (192 preps) | Cat. 58100 (50 preps) | Cat. 62800 (2 x 96-well) | Cat. 62000 (10 preps) | Cat. 64000 (50 preps) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lysis Buffer D | 1 x 125 mL 1 x 45 mL |
- | - | 1 x 125 mL 1 x 45 mL |
45 mL |
| Lysis Buffer L | - | 60 mL | 1 x 105 mL 1 x 60 mL |
- | |
| Lysis Additive A | 50 mL | 6 mL | 25 mL | 50 mL | 2 x 6 mL |
| Binding Buffer I | 25 mL | 7 mL | 25 mL | 25 mL | 7 mL |
| OSR Solution | 12 mL | 3 mL | 12 mL | 12 mL | 3 mL |
| Lysis Buffer QP | 88 mL | - | - | 88 mL | 25 mL |
| Binding Buffer B | 110 mL | 2 x 12 mL | 85 mL | 110 mL | - |
| Magnetic Beads B | - | 1.1 mL | 2 x 2.2 mL | 1 | - |
| Solution WN | - | 55 mL | 4 x 55 mL | 1 | - |
| Wash Solution A | 2 x 38 mL | - | - | 2 x 38 mL | 18 mL |
| Elution Buffer B | 30 mL | 8 mL | 30 mL | 30 mL | 8 mL |
| Maxi Bead B Tubes | - | - | - | 10 | - |
| Maxi Spin Column | - | - | - | 10 | - |
| Spin Columns | - | - | - | 50 | - |
| Collection Tubes | - | - | - | 50 | - |
| Bead B Tubes | 200 | 2 x 25 | 8 x 25 | 1 | 50 |
| Elution Tubes (1.7 mL) | - | 2 x 25 | - | - | 50 |
| Elution Tubes | - | - | - | 10 | - |
| 96-Well Plate | 2 | - | 2 | 1 | - |
| 96-Well Filter Plate | 2 | - | - | 1 | - |
| 96-Well Collection Plate | 2 | - | - | 1 | - |
| Adhesive Tape | 4 | - | 2 | 1 | - |
| 96-Well Elution Plate | 2 | - | 2 | 1 | - |
| Product Insert | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Automation
Automation Scripts Available!
Enter your professional contact information and receive access to automation protocol scripts.
Documentation
- in a timely manner that considers the person's accessibility needs due to disability; and
- at a cost that is no more than the regular cost charged to other persons
FAQs
SKU 26560
If the DNA does not perform well in downstream applications, it may be due to one or more of the following:
- Eluted DNA sample is brown.
The elution contains high humic acids. Ensure that the OSR Solution was added to the clean lysate, followed by the HAR plate step to remove humic acids.
- DNA was not washed with the provided Buffer SK and Wash Solution A.
Traces of humic acids or salt from the binding step may remain in the sample if the column is not washed with the provided Buffer SK and Wash Solution A. Humic acids and salt may interfere with downstream applications, and thus must be washed from the column.
- Ethanol carryover.
Ensure that the dry spin under the Wash procedure is performed and pat the bottom of the 96-Well Filter plate on a clean paper towel to remove the residual wash solution. Ethanol is known to interfere with many downstream applications.
- PCR reaction conditions need to be optimized.
Take steps to optimize the PCR conditions being used, including varying the amount of template (10 ng to 50 ng for 20 µL of PCR reaction is recommended), changing the source of Taq polymerase, looking into the primer design, and adjusting the annealing conditions.
SKU 26560, 62000
Poor DNA recovery could be due to one or more of the following:
- Homogenization was incomplete.
Depending on the type of soil, optimization of the homogenization with the flat bed vortex or bead beater equipment may be required. However, it is not recommended to increase the vortex time to longer than 10 minutes at maximum speed.
- Lysis Additive A was not added to the lysate.
Ensure that the provided Lysis Additive A is added to separate humic acid and increase DNA yield.
- Ethanol was not added to the lysate.
Ensure that the indicated amount of 96-100% ethanol is added to the lysate before binding to the column.
- Ethanol was not added to the Wash Solution A.
Ensure that the indicated amount of 96-100% ethanol is added to the supplied Wash Solution A prior to use.
SKU 58100, 62800
If the magnetic beads were accidently pipetted up with the supernatant, the pipette tip was placed too close to the magnetic beads while pipetting. Simply return the magnetic beads and the supernatant back into the sample well. Mix well, and place the plate back onto the magnetic separation plate for the specified time. Carefully remove the supernatant without touching the magnetic beads
If RNA is present in eluted DNA, it's because RNA is coeluted with the DNA. Carry out a digestion with RNase A on the elution if the RNA present will interfere with downstream applications. Refer to manufacturer’s instructions regarding amount of enzyme to use, optimal incubation time and temperature.
A low genomic DNA yield may be caused by the following:
- Incomplete lysis of cells.
Ensure that Lysis Additive A is added. Also, incubation at 65ºC may result in increased yields.
- Amount of magnetic beads added was not sufficient.
Ensure that the magnetic bead suspension is mixed well prior to use to avoid any inconsistency in DNA isolation.
- DNA concentration in the soil sample being used is low.
Some soil types contain very little target DNA. Incubation at 65ºC may result in increased yields.
If the DNA does not perform well in downstream applications, it may be due to one or more of the following:
- Eluted DNA sample is brown.
The elution contains high humic acids. Ensure that the OSR Solution was added to the clean lysate.
- DNA was not washed with the provided Buffer SK.
Traces of humic acids or salt from the binding step may remain in the sample if the magnetic beads are not washed with the provided Buffer SK. Humic acids and salt may interfere with downstream applications and thus must be washed from the magnetic beads.
- Ethanol carryover.
Ensure that the drying step after the 70% ethanol wash steps is performed in order to remove traces of ethanol prior to elution. Ethanol is known to interfere with many downstream applications.
SKU 62000
If the DNA does not perform well in downstream applications, it may be due to one or more of the following:
- Eluted DNA sample is brown.
The elution contains high humic acids. Ensure that the OSR Solution was added to the clean lysate.
- DNA was not washed with the provided Buffer SK and Wash Solution A.
Traces of humic acids or salt from the binding step may remain in the sample if the column is not washed with the provided Buffer SK and Wash Solution A. Humic acids and salt may interfere with downstream applications and thus must be washed from the column.
- Ethanol carryover.
Ensure that the dry spin under the Column Wash procedure is performed in order to remove traces of ethanol prior to elution. Ethanol is known to interfere with many downstream applications.
- PCR reaction conditions need to be optimized.
Take steps to optimize the PCR conditions being used, including varying the amount of template (10 ng to 50 ng for 20 µL of PCR reaction is recommended), changing the source of Taq polymerase, looking into the primer design, and adjusting the annealing conditions.
SKU 64000
Poor DNA recovery could be due to one or more of the following:
- Homogenization was incomplete.
Depending on the type of soil, further vortexing with the flat bed vortex or bead beater equipment may be required. However, it is not recommended to increase the vortex time to longer than 10 minutes at maximum speed.
- Lysis Additive A was not added to the lysate.
Ensure that the provided Lysis Additive A is added to separate humic acid and increase DNA yield.
- Lysis Buffer QP and Ethanol were not added to the lysate.
Ensure that 400 µL of Lysis Buffer QP and 550 µL of 96-100% ethanol are added to the lysate before binding to the column.
- Ethanol was not added to the Wash Solution A.
Ensure that 42 mL of 96-100% ethanol is added to the supplied Wash Solution A prior to use.
If the DNA does not perform well in downstream applications, it may be due to one or more of the following:
- Eluted DNA sample is brown.
The elution contains high humic acids. Ensure that the OSR Solution was added to the clean lysate. Also, ensure the column was washed with Binding Buffer B.
- DNA was not washed with the provided Binding Buffer B and Wash Solution A.
Traces of humic acids or salt from the binding step may remain in the sample if the column is not washed with the provided Binding Buffer B and Wash Solution A. Humic acids and salt may interfere with downstream applications, and thus must be washed from the column.
- Ethanol carryover.
Ensure that the dry spin under the Column Wash procedure is performed in order to remove traces of ethanol prior to elution. Ethanol is known to interfere with many downstream applications.
- PCR reaction conditions need to be optimized.
Take steps to optimize the PCR conditions being used, including varying the amount of template (10 ng to 50 ng for 20 µL of PCR reaction is recommended), changing the source of Taq polymerase, looking into the primer design, and adjusting the annealing conditions.
| Title | Co-fermentation of aflatoxin-contaminated figs and potato peels for hydrogen generation by natural microflora |
| Citation | International Journey of Hydrogen Energy 2026. |
| Authors | Alime Şenocak, Hidayet Argun |
| Title | Evaluation of commercial kits and purification approaches for DNA extraction from atmospheric samples for 3rd generation sequencing without amplification |
| Citation | Nature Scientific Reports 2026. |
| Authors | Julija Salokas, Svetlana Sofieva-Rios, Jussi Paatero, Eija Asmi, Ari Karppinen & Mikhail Sofiev |
| Title | Antibiotic resistance genes in farm animal slaughterhouse wastes in Al-Dewanyiah province, Iraq |
| Citation | Veterinary Integrative Sciences 2025. |
| Authors | Amjed Alsultan, Dhama Al-sallami, Mohammed Alsaadi |
| Title | Molecular Profiling and Precise Diagnosis of Pratylenchus penetrans Infestation in Soil: A qPCR-Based Molecular Approach |
| Citation | The Plant Pathology Journal 2025. |
| Authors | Karthi Natesan , Byeong-yong Park , Hyoung-Rai Ko , Eunhwa Kim, Sohee Park , and Sekeun Park |
| Title | Monitoring marine pollution effects through targeted environmental DNA (eDNA) testing in the Pacific northwest |
| Citation | Marine Pollution Bulletin 2025. |
| Authors | Neha Acharya-Patel a, Karen Cram b, Emma T. Groenwold a, Hajeong Lee a, Abigail G. Keller c, Breanna Bomback b, Shirley Lyons d, Rene L. Warren e, Lauren Coombe e, Christopher J. Lowe d, Lauren C. Bergman a, Farida Bishay f, Inanc Birol e, Tara A. Macdonald b, Caren C. Helbing |
| Title | eDNA metabarcoding-based source attribution of fecal indicator bacteria exceedances in urban freshwater beaches, sand and rivers |
| Citation | Royal Society of Chemistry 2025. |
| Authors | Faizan Saleem, Jennifer L. Jiang, Enze Li, Kevin L. Tran, Herb E. Schellhorn and Thomas A. Edge |
| Title | Uropygial gland microbiota of nearctic-neotropical migrants vary with season and migration distance |
| Citation | Animal Microbiome 2025. |
| Authors | Leanne A Grieves 1,2,?, Gregory B Gloor |
| Title | Sedimentary DNA Metabarcoding and Indigenous Knowledge Reconstruct Natural and Anthropogenic Disturbances to a Freshwater Lake in the Oil Sands Region of Alberta, Canada |
| Citation | Environmental DNA 2025. |
| Authors | Mark Louie D. Lopez | Ave Dersch | Paul Drevnick | Rute Clemente-Carvalho | Evan Morien | Christopher F. G. Hebda | Erin Ussery | Mark E. McMaster | Matthew A. Lemay | Caren C. Helbing |
| Title | Identification and Application of Phocaeicola-Specific Conserved Signature DNA Markers for Human Fecal Source Tracking |
| Citation | environments 2025. |
| Authors | Enze Li, Faizan Saleem, Sarah Bello, Thomas A. Edge, Radhey S. Gupta, Herb E. Schellhorn |
| Title | Bacterial community dynamics in early gametophyte developmental stages of the giant kelp Macrocystis pyrifera (Linnaeus) C. Agardh |
| Citation | Journal of Applied Phycology 2025. |
| Authors | Gonzalo Icaza, Carolina Camus, Gustavo Rodríguez-Valdecantos, Genesis Parada-Pozo, Camila Martínez, Liliana Muñoz, Sylvain Faugeron, Nicole Trefault |
NGS Services
Free trials available for Small RNA and RNA sequencing projects!
Book Consultation Learn More