Comparison of Commercial Kits for Recovery and Analysis of Bacterial DNA From Fingerprints

In forensic science, fingerprints are a common source of evidentiary information. However, latent examination is not always successful and trace human DNA cannot always be obtained. Thus, examining the fingerprint microbiome may offer a suitable alternative to more traditional methods of forensic identification. The Zymo Research ZR Bacterial/Fungal DNA MicroPrep™ Kit, Qiagen QIAmp^® DNA Mini Kit, Promega Wizard^® Genomic DNA Purification Kit, and the MPBio FastDNA^® Spin Kit were compared for their ability to yield a sufficient amount of bacterial DNA for next-generation sequencing in order to obtain a microbiome profile. Prints were deposited onto slides, allowed to sit for up to 1 month, and total DNA isolated and quantified using each kit. The kit from Zymo Research yielded the most concentrated DNA sample (0.0084 ng/µL) in the least amount of time as compared to other kits examined. Although this amount of DNA was far below the recommended DNA concentration threshold recommended for next-generation sequencing, a microbiome profile was successfully obtained. As interest in using the microbiome of an individual as a forensic tool continues to increase, there is the possibility that the microbiome of a fingerprint could complement traditional human DNA profiling in the future. This study provides evidence that trace amounts of bacterial DNA from fingerprints is quantifiable and sufficient for microbiome analysis.     

Establishing an integrated pipeline for automatic and efficient detection of trace DNA encountered in forensic applications

The analysis of trace DNA is a crucial component in forensic applications. Biological materials containing low-level DNA collected at crime scenes, such as fingerprints, can be valuable as evidence. Automatic detection of biological samples has been largely embraced in forensic applications to meet the increasing throughput requirements. However, the amount of DNA automatically retrieved from trace evidence often tends to be small and unstable, ultimately resulting in poor detection of DNA profiles. Thus, in this work, we introduced a robust DNA extraction and purification platform named Bionewtech® BN3200 (Bionewtech®, Shanghai, China) with the goal of constructing a rapid automatic detection system for trace DNA. The establishment of automatic detection system for trace DNA mainly encompassed two parts: assessing the sensitivity of automatic extraction platform and screening the optimal short tandem repeat (STR) typing kit. The sensitivity of Bionewtech® BN3200 platform based on Ultra-sensitive DNA Extraction kit was initially estimated, demonstrating that this extraction platform might contain large potential in the trace DNA extraction. For the amplification part, three sets of commercial multiplex STR typing kits were selected as candidates, and the amplified products were further genotyped on the Applied Biosystems 3500xl Genetic Analyzer. After comparation, SiFa™ 23 Plex Kit was determined as the most suitable amplification system for trace DNA. Eventually, the newly exploited trace DNA detection system was successfully implemented in the detection of fingerprints derived from glass surfaces with the five-seconds contact time. As a result, the DNA recovered from the fingerprints fluctuated approximately from 57.60 pg to 18.05 ng, in addition, over 70% of the total STR loci were detected in 75% of the fingerprint samples.     

Automated DNA extraction using the QIAsymphony platform: Estimation of DNA recovery from simulated forensic stains

The aim of this study was to evaluate the forensic protocol recently developed by Qiagen for the QIAsymphony automated DNA extraction platform. Samples containing low amounts of DNA were specifically considered, since they represent the majority of samples processed in our laboratory. The analysis of simulated blood and saliva traces showed that the highest DNA yields were obtained with the maximal elution volume available for the forensic protocol, that is 200 μl. Resulting DNA extracts were too diluted for successful DNA profiling and required a concentration. This additional step is time consuming and potentially increases inversion and contamination risks. The 200 μl DNA extracts were concentrated to 25 μl, and the DNA recovery estimated with real-time PCR as well as with the percentage of SGM Plus alleles detected. Results using our manual protocol, based on the QIAamp DNA mini kit, and the automated protocol were comparable. Further tests will be conducted to determine more precisely DNA recovery, contamination risk and PCR inhibitors removal, once a definitive procedure, allowing the concentration of DNA extracts from low yield samples, will be available for the QIAsymphony.     

Assessment of PowerPlex® Fusion 5C’s ability to type degraded DNA

DNA samples collected at crime scenes are often degraded so this research focused on the ability of the Promega PowerPlex® Fusion 5C amplification kit to type both naturally and artificially degraded DNA.DNA was degraded naturally by placing equal volumes of blood on white fabric that was stored either inside, outside in a shaded area, or outside in direct sunlight. Samples were then collected every 10 days for 60 days and the DNA extracted (QIAamp® DNA Investigator). Artificially degraded samples were created by exposing extracted DNA to either UV light or 95 °C heat for varying times. DNA was also degraded artificially by placing blood samples into a 50% bleach solution for varying times prior to extraction.Following sample treatment, standard forensic DNA analysis was performed including quantification (Investigator® Quantiplex) and amplification (PowerPlex® Fusion 5C). Separation and detection were performed on an ABI 3130xl capillary electrophoresis unit and analysis was performed using GeneMapper ID v3.2.1.While the time and shade samples showed similar amounts of degradation, the samples exposed to direct sun showed more degradation. The artificially degraded samples showed more signs of degradation such as reduced overall peak height and peak height imbalance at heterozygous loci. There were also some cases where an allele that was known to be in the profile exhibited total dropout. Although there were some instances of both allelic dropout and heterozygote peak imbalance, PowerPlex® Fusion was able to reliably type degraded DNA as all alleles detected were consistent with the known donor profile. The results show that PowerPlex® Fusion is a robust kit capable of handling forensically challenged samples.     

Simple and highly effective DNA extraction methods from old skeletal remains using silica columns

The recovery of DNA data from old skeletal remains is often difficult due to degraded and very low yield of extracted DNA and the presence of PCR inhibitors. Herein, we compared several silica-based DNA extraction methods from artificially degraded DNA, DNA with PCR inhibitors and DNA from old skeletal remains using quantitative real-time PCR. We present a modified large-scale silica-based extraction combined with complete demineralization, that enables maximum DNA recovery and efficient elimination of PCR inhibitors. This is performed with high concentration of EDTA solution for demineralization of bone powder followed by QIAamp^® spin columns and buffers from the QIAquick^® PCR purification kit. We have successfully used this modified technique to perform STR analysis for 55-year-old skeletal remains. The results of this study will contribute to solve the forensic cases dealing with skeletal remains.     

Comparison of three DNA extraction methods for three different types of fired and unfired ammunition

When handling ammunition for gun loading, epithelial cells from the hands can become adhered to the metal surface, and this trace is a potential source of DNA. This work aimed to compare the efficiency of three DNA extraction methods from fired cartridge cases from three different types of firearms: a 12-gauge shotgun, a point 40 S&W pistol, and a 7.62 mm rifle. Nine volunteers were involved in this study handling 42 pieces of ammunition overall. The unfired ammunition was handled by a known good donor, and we used this data for comparison. DNA profiling was carried out with EZ1 DNA Investigator Kit for EZ1 Advanced XL automated DNA extraction, QIAmp DNA Investigator kit for a non-automated silica-based membrane column method, and direct lysis protocol for a non-automated in-house one. Samples were collected with 0.5 × 0.5 cm pieces of FTA filter paper moistened with distilled water. Quantiplex Pro RGQ kit and Fusion Powerplex 6C were used for genotyping samples. QIAmp DNA Investigator method resulted in the best number of alleles recovered for both conditions tested, both unfired and fired ammunitions: 77 % vs. 19.3 %, followed by the automated extraction (28.6 % vs. 4.3 %) and lysis protocol (0 % vs. 3.9 %). Degradation data from fired cartridge cases were 27 % for column method, 50 % for lysis protocol, and 87 % for EZ1 kit. Kruskal-Wallis test for mean DNA concentration from these samples returned p < 0.05, and Dunn’s multiple comparison test indicated a significant difference between calibers 0.40 S&W and 12-gauge shotgun from lyses protocol method. We did not detect any other significant differences on the test. The 12-gauge shotgun cartridge cases resulted in a high number of alleles overall (56.8 %). The numerous steps for DNA extraction and purification in the column method may explain its better performance. Although the results obtained indicate that all methods be used for DNA extraction from this type of evidence, the silica-based membrane column method appears to be more efficient.     

The effect of NucleoSpin® Forensic Filters on DNA recovery from trace DNA swabs

Forensic DNA profiling is a globally accepted method for human identification, however, obtaining full DNA profiles from trace DNA can be challenging. The optimal recovery of DNA from trace DNA swabs is therefore crucial. Methods for extracting DNA from swabs often make use of a spin basket combined with a centrifugation step, to enhance the release of cells from the swab prior to DNA extraction. The NucleoSpin® Forensic Filter (Macherey-Nagel, Düren) is a type of spin basket, but it has not been thoroughly assessed on trace DNA samples. This study aimed to assess if the inclusion of the NucleoSpin® Forensic Filter significantly improved DNA recovery and DNA profiling success from cotton and flocked swabs used to collect trace DNA and buccal cells (control). Buccal cells and trace DNA samples were collected from 25 volunteers using each swab type (cotton and flocked) in duplicate. DNA was extracted from the samples using the NucleoSpin® DNA Forensic kit, one set with, and the other set without, NucleoSpin® Forensic Filters. DNA concentration was assessed using real time PCR, and DNA profiling was done using the PowerPlex® ESX 16 system. The inclusion of the NucleoSpin® Forensic Filters significantly improved DNA concentration for buccal cells that were collected using flocked swabs (p = 0.035). However, no significant differences were noted for trace DNA samples for either swab type. There was also no significant difference in DNA profiling success when NucleoSpin® Forensic Filters were used, regardless of swab and sample type. These results may be helpful for laboratories that are considering the NucleoSpin® Forensic Filters in the DNA extraction workflow, particularly for trace DNA samples.     

Qiagen's Investigator™ Quantiplex Kit as a Predictor of STR Amplification Success from Low‐Yield DNA Samples,

Qiagen's Investigator? Quantiplex kit, a total human DNA quantitation kit, has a 200‐base pair internal control, fast cycling time, and scorpion molecules containing a covalently linked primer, probe, fluorophore, and quencher. The Investigator? Quantiplex kit was evaluated to investigate a value under which complete short tandem repeat (STR) failure was consistently obtained. Buccal swabs were extracted using the Qiagen QIAamp^® DNA Blood Mini Kit, quantified with the Investigator? Quantiplex kit using a tested half‐volume reaction, amplified with the ABI AmpFlSTR^® Identifiler kit, separated on the 3100Avant Genetic Analyzer, and data analyzed with GeneMapper^® ID v.3.2. While undetected samples were unlikely to produce sufficient data for statistical calculations or CODIS upload (2.00 alleles and 0.82 complete loci on average), data may be useful for exclusionary purposes. Thus, the Investigator? Quantiplex kit may be useful for predicting STR success. These findings are comparable with previously reported data from the Quantifiler? Human kit.     

Forensic human identification: Investigation into tooth morphotype and DNA extraction methods from teeth

When a body is decomposed, hard tissues such as teeth may provide the only DNA source for human identification. There is currently no consensus as to the best DNA extraction method, and there is a lack of empirical data regarding tooth morphotype and condition that may impact DNA recovery. Therefore, this study sought to investigate which variables significantly improved DNA concentration, integrity and profiling success. A total of 52 human teeth were assessed, representing all tooth morphotypes from three deceased individuals. DNA was extracted using both the QIAamp® DNA Investigator Kit and the phenol-chloroform method. DNA concentration and degradation index were assessed using real time PCR, prior to conventional DNA profiling. Contrary to international guidelines promoting the use of molars, DNA profiling from molars was the least successful, with premolars, followed by canines, performing the best. The presence of fillings reduced the DNA quantity and quality obtained and may explain the poor performance of molars. DNA from the maxillae were significantly less degraded when the QIAamp® was used, although this did not influence DNA profiling success. A significant increase in DNA concentration, integrity and profiling success was observed in diseased teeth (periodontitis) compared to those without disease. This may be due to increased white blood cell presence at the site. There was no significant difference in DNA profiling success between the two DNA extraction methods. However, different teeth yielded failed DNA profiles for each extraction method, suggesting that repeated attempts, using alternative DNA extraction methods, is recommended. The recovery of additional DNA profiling information from degraded samples may help to ultimately reduce the burden of unidentified human remains.     

MiniFiler试剂盒运用于法医微量物证的检验

目的应用MiniFiler试剂盒对法医微量物证进行DNA分析。方法采用MiniFiler试剂盒对样本进行DNA分型,确定样本9个STR基因座的等位基因型。结果10pg DNA模板经MiniFiler试剂盒扩增后,能够进行DNA分型,但40pg以上的DNA方可得到稳定可靠的分型结果。结论MiniFiler试剂盒可以用于法医微量物证的STR分析。     

A comparative study of two extraction methods routinely used for DNA recovery from simulated post coital samples

In sexual assault cases DNA profiling of spermatozoa can be of critical importance. Most methods use differential extraction of the spermatozoa to separate it from the female component. Here we have compared two commercially available differential extraction methods, the QIAamp^® DNA mini kit (Qiagen) and Differex™ with the DNA IQ^® System (Promega). Simulated postcoital samples were prepared using buccal cells from a female donor and spermatozoa from three male donors. A dilution series ranging from neat semen to a 1:1500 dilution (semen:dH₂O) was prepared and mixed with an equal volume of saliva from a female donor. Extraction efficiency was assessed using DNA concentration measured with NanoDrop 2000 and Quantifiler^® Human DNA Quantification Kit and the profile count of full, partial and mixed DNA profiles generated using SGM Plus and PowerPlex^® ESI 17. Statistical analysis was carried out using Randomisation in R, which is a robust model making no assumption of the distribution of data. Based on the amount of DNA extracted and the types of profiles no significant difference in the performance of the two extraction kits was seen. However, the processing time taken with the Differex™ System was about half than that of the QIAamp^® DNA mini kit and involved fewer liquid transfers.     

New optimized DNA extraction protocol for fingerprints deposited on a special self-adhesive security seal and other latent samples used for human identification

Abstract: Obtaining complete short tandem repeat (STR) profiles from fingerprints containing minimal amounts of DNA, using standard extraction techniques, can be difficult. The aim of this study was to evaluate a new kit, Fingerprint DNA Finder (FDF Kit), recently launched for the extraction of DNA and STR profiling from fingerprints placed on a special device known as Self‐Adhesive Security Seal Sticker^® and other latent fingerprints on forensic evidentiary material like metallic guns. The DNA extraction system is based on a reversal of the silica principle, and all the potential inhibiting substances are retained on the surface of a special adsorbent, while nucleic acids are not bound and remain in solution dramatically improving DNA recovery. DNA yield was quite variable among the samples tested, rendering in most of the cases (>90%) complete STR profiles, free of PCR inhibitors, and devoid of artifacts. Even samples with DNA amount below 100 pg could be successfully analyzed.     

The Extraction and Recovery Efficiency of Pure DNA for Different Types of Swabs

The extraction and recovery efficiency of swabs used to collect evidence at crime scenes is relatively low (typically <50%) for bacterial spores and body fluids. Cell‐free deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is an interesting alternative compared to whole cells as a source for forensic analysis, but extraction and recovery from swabs has not been tested before using pure DNA. In this study cotton, foam, nylon flocked, polyester and rayon swabs are investigated in order to collect pure DNA isolated from saliva samples. The morphology and absorption capacity of swabs is studied. Extraction and recovery efficiencies are determined and compared to the maximum theoretical efficiency. The results indicate that a substantial part of DNA is not extracted from the swab and some types of swab seem to bind effectively with DNA. The efficiency of the different types of swab never exceeds 50%. The nylon flocked 4N6FLOQSwab used for buccal sampling performs the best.     

Use of a commercially available hydrogel as a novel DNA surface sampling tool

A common requirement in the military, law enforcement, and forensic mission space is the need to collect trace samples from surfaces using a method that not only readily captures the sample but also retains its integrity for downstream identification and characterization. Additionally, collecting samples from three-dimensional objects (e.g., shell casings) is a challenge for which there is currently no validated standardized approach. Recently, hydrogels have been shown to have the potential for surface collection of trace bacterial spores, amino acids, and DNA. To test whether these hydrogels can serve as a viable collection medium for sampling DNA from surfaces, we carried out a series of preliminary tests examining collection efficiency and suitability of hydrogel material to recover samples of diluted, dried human DNA on a smooth polycarbonate surface. The recovery of surface DNA using a commercially available hydrogel was examined, and the efficiency compared to samples collected using a standard foam collection swab. DNA collected using the hydrogel and swab methods was then examined using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and short tandem repeat (STR) analysis to determine whether the collection material was compatible with these downstream processes. The hydrogel material used for this study collected the experimental DNA with comparable efficiency to standard collection swabs. In addition, qPCR and STR analyses demonstrated compatibility with the hydrogel collection and extraction process. These data suggest that hydrogels have the potential to be used as sample collection materials and deserve further characterization to elucidate their utility in collection from irregularly shaped, three-dimensional surfaces/materials.     

Recovery of human DNA profiles from poached deer remains part 2: Improved recovery protocol without the need for LCN analysis

Although poaching is a common wildlife crime, the high and prohibitive cost of specialised animal testing means that many cases are left un-investigated. We previously described a novel approach to wildlife crime investigation that looked at the identification of human DNA on poached animal remains (Tobe, Govan and Welch, 2011). Human DNA was successfully isolated and amplified from simulated poaching incidents, however a low template protocol was required which made this method unsuitable for use in many laboratories. We now report on an optimised recovery and amplification protocol which removes the need for low template analysis.Samples from 10 deer (40 samples total — one from each leg) analysed in the original study were re-analysed in the current study with an additional 11 deer samples. Four samples analysed using Chelex did not show any results and a new method was devised whereby the available DNA was concentrated. By combining the DNA extracts from all tapings of the same deer remains followed by concentration, the recovered quantity of human DNA was found to be 29.5 pg ± 43.2 pg, 31 × greater than the previous study. The use of the Investigator Decaplex SE (QIAGEN) STR kit provided better results in the form of more complete profiles than did the AmpF?STR® SGM Plus® kit at 30 cycles (Applied Biosystems). Re-analysis of the samples from the initial study using the new, optimised protocol resulted in an average increase of 18% of recovered alleles. Over 17 samples, 71% of the samples analysed using the optimised protocol showed sufficient amplification for comparison to a reference profile and gave match probabilities ranging from 7.7690 × 10^? 05 to 2.2706 × 10^? 14.The removal of low template analysis means this optimised method provides evidence of high probative value and is suitable for immediate use in forensic laboratories. All methods and techniques used are standard and are compatible with current SOPs. As no high cost non-human DNA analysis is required the overall process is no more expensive than the investigation of other volume crime samples. The technique is suitable for immediate use in poaching incidents.     

The use of Hemastix® severely reduces DNA recovery using the BioRobot® EZ1

Abstract: The choice of reagents for presumptive tests for blood, and subsequent extraction methodologies, can significantly affect both the quantity and quality of purified DNA. Blood samples directly tested with Hemastix^® yielded <1% of the DNA recovered from untested samples when purified using the Qiagen BioRobot^® EZ1 and EZ1^® DNA Investigator kit. Full short tandem repeat profiles were obtained from both tested and untested samples, suggesting that the Hemastix^® reagent(s) affect DNA binding, rather than produce DNA damage. The Hemastix^® inhibition of DNA yield could be overcome by the addition of MTL buffer to the sample prior to extraction. Laboratories may wish to modify current procedures for extracting blood samples, utilize other extraction/purification methodologies, or inform their submitting agencies to avoid direct exposure of questioned bloodstains to Hemastix^® reagents.     

Development of a one-tube extraction and amplification method for DNA analysis of sperm and epithelial cells recovered from forensic samples by laser microdissection

Laser microdissection can be used in forensic casework to isolate specific cell types from mixtures of biological samples. Extraction of DNA from selected cells is still required prior to STR amplification. Because of the relatively pristine nature of the recovered cells, laser microdissection is more sensitive than more traditional methods of DNA analysis, theoretically resulting in DNA profiles from less cellular material. A one-tube extraction and amplification method minimises loss of DNA through liquid transfers and reduces the potential for contamination events occurring. In this paper, the development of a one-tube method for the effective extraction of DNA from laser microdissected sperm and epithelial cells is described. The performance of the in-house method was compared to that of a commercial DNA extraction kit for extraction of DNA from sperm and the downstream compatibility with STR amplification was determined for both sperm and epithelial samples. Full Identifiler™ profiles after 28 amplification cycles were obtained from as few as 15 epithelial cells and 30 sperm.     

Optimisation of cellular DNA recovery from tape-lifts

Adhesive tape-lifts are a commonly used technique for the recovery of DNA from forensic exhibits. Examination of large forensic exhibits or tape-lifts from old “cold” cases can make the direct submission of the tapes for extraction difficult. By applying a swab loaded with an organic solvent to the tape-lift, any DNA bound to the tape can be transferred and concentrated on to the swab head. Whilst removing any DNA, the tape's glue adhesive is also transferred. This requires a modified extraction technique that can dissolve the adhesive whilst maintaining the integrity of any DNA. Of several solvents tested, xylene was shown to be the solvent of choice, efficiently removing the adhesive and any bound DNA. A modified chelex extraction method, again incorporating xylene, provided optimal conditions for dissolving the adhesive and releasing the DNA for lysis.     

The NucleoSpin DNA Clean-up XS kit for the concentration and purification of genomic DNA extracts: An alternative to microdialysis filtration

Traditionally, DNA extracts from biological evidence items have been concentrated and rinsed using microdialysis filtration units, including the Centricon^® and Microcon^® centrifugal filter devices. As an alternative to microdialysis filtration, we present an optimized method for using NucleoSpin^® XS silica columns to concentrate and clean-up aqueous extracts from the organic extraction of DNA from biological samples. The method can be used with standard organic extraction and dithiothreitol (DTT)-based differential extraction methods with no modifications to these methods prior to the concentration and clean-up step. Extracts from laboratory-prepared bloodstains, saliva and semen stains have been successfully amplified with both qPCR and STR assays. Finally, the total time to process a set of samples with the NucleoSpin^® XS column is approximately 30 min vs. approximately 1.5 h with the Centricon^® YM-100 filter device.     

An Optimized DNA Analysis Workflow for the Sampling,Extraction, and Concentration of DNA obtained from Archived Latent Fingerprints

DNA profiles have been obtained from fingerprints, but there is limited knowledge regarding DNA analysis from archived latent fingerprints—touch DNA “sandwiched” between adhesive and paper. Thus, this study sought to comparatively analyze a variety of collection and analytical methods in an effort to seek an optimized workflow for this specific sample type. Untreated and treated archived latent fingerprints were utilized to compare different biological sampling techniques, swab diluents, DNA extraction systems, DNA concentration practices, and post‐amplification purification methods. Archived latent fingerprints disassembled and sampled via direct cutting, followed by DNA extracted using the QIAamp® DNA Investigator Kit, and concentration with Centri‐Sep? columns increased the odds of obtaining an STR profile. Using the recommended DNA workflow, 9 of the 10 samples provided STR profiles, which included 7–100% of the expected STR alleles and two full profiles. Thus, with carefully selected procedures, archived latent fingerprints can be a viable DNA source for criminal investigations including cold/postconviction cases.