DNA recovery from different evidences in 300 cases of sexual assault

Almost 60% of the DNA evidences analyzed in our laboratory correspond to sexual assault cases. With the aim to assess the efficiency of the DNA IQ System (Promega) in recovering the perpetrator DNA profile, the statistical analysis of results obtained in 300 casework was performed. In such cases, 850 evidence samples were processed. In 71% of the cases the perpetrator DNA profile was detected in at least one of the submitted casework samples, with a minimum of 13 STRs markers typed using the AmpFlSTR Identifiler PCR amplification kit (Applied Biosystem). When the suspect DNA profile was available, 67% matched with the evidence.With regard to the type of evidence, the best performance corresponded to panties, with more than 70% of success in recovering male profile, whereas the efficiency of vaginal swabs was almost 60%, with a higher incidence of victim/perpetrator mixed profiles.     

Development of a rapid, 96-well alkaline based differential DNA extraction method for sexual assault evidence

We present a rapid alkaline lysis procedure for the extraction of DNA from sexual assault evidence that generates purified sperm fraction extracts that yield STR typing results similar to those obtained from the traditional organic/dithiothreitol differential extraction. Specifically, a sodium hydroxide based differential extraction method has been developed in a single-tube format and further optimized in a 96-well format. The method yields purified extracts from a small sample set (∼2-6 swabs) in approximately 2 h and from a larger sample set (up to 96 swabs) in approximately 4 h. While conventional differential extraction methods require vigorous sample manipulation to remove the spermatozoa from the substrate, the method described here exploits the propensity of sperm to adhere to a substrate and does not require any manipulation of the substrate after it is sampled. For swabs, sample handling is minimized by employing a process where the tip of the swab, including the shaft, is transferred to the appropriate vessel eliminating the need for potentially hazardous scalpels to separate the swab material from the shaft. The absence of multiple handling steps allows the process to be semi-automated, however the procedure as described here does not require use of a robotic system. This method may provide forensic laboratories a cost-effective tool for the eradication of backlogs of sexual assault evidence, and more timely service to their client agencies. In addition, we have demonstrated that a modification of the procedure can be used to retrieve residual sperm-cell DNA from previously extracted swabs.     

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.     

全血中扎来普隆两种萃取方法的比较

目的建立血样中扎来普隆的液液萃取和固相萃取方法。方法液液萃取方法是在碱性条件下用二氯甲烷提取。固相萃取是采用OasisHLB固相萃取柱提取,萃取液均用GC/NPD检验,并对其进行比较。结果血样中扎来普隆固相萃取平均回收率达89%以上,液液萃取平均回收率为84%,GC/NPD最低检出限为2×10-2μg.mL-1。结论两种方法均能满足实际检案的需求,而固相萃取方法在减少仪器损耗和内源性杂质干扰方面具有较大的优势。     

两种DNA提取法对不同色泽肋软骨STR分型成功率的比较

目的比较两种DNA提取法对不同色泽肋软骨的DNASTR分型结果的影响。方法利用Chelex-100法和酚-氯仿法,分别对30例不同色泽的腐败尸体肋软骨进行DNA提取,STR复合扩增,ABI3100型基因分析仪对扩增产物进行检测。结果用酚-氯仿法提取的30例腐败尸体肋软骨,均检测到全部STR基因座的等位基因型。用Chelex-100法提取的肋软骨中,22例(11例白色、8例淡黄色、3例黄色)检测出全部STR基因座的等位基因型;7例(3例黄色、4例黄褐色)检测出部分STR基因座的等位基因型;1例黑灰色的腐败尸体肋软骨,未检测出STR基因座的等位基因型。结论根据肋软骨的色泽,选择适宜的DNA提取方法。对于颜色较深的肋软骨,用酚-氯仿法进行DNA提取有助于提高其STR基因座的检出率。     

3种甲醛固定组织DNA提取方法的比较

目的对不同方法提取甲醛固定组织中DNA的效果进行比较,寻找一种操作简便、经济实用、质量较高的DNA提取方法。方法取甲醛固定的心肌组织14份,分别以改良酚-氯仿法,改良Trizol法,试剂盒法提取DNA,进行紫外分光光度计测定OD260/OD280值后,经PCR扩增,琼脂糖凝胶电泳分析确定提取的DNA质量。结果改良酚-氯仿法,改良Trizol法,试剂盒法OD260/OD280比值分别为1.841 5±0.380 4、1.370 5±0.336 7、0.831 6±0.175 0。两两比较均有显著性差异(P<0.05)。3种不同方法提取DNA含量分别为0.943 8±0.530 1、0.707 5±0.423 6、0.342 8±0.182 5。PCR扩增后琼脂糖凝胶电泳显示以改良酚-氯仿法所提DNA的谱带清晰度好于其它两种方法。结论改良酚-氯仿法简便有效,所用试剂价格低廉,是一种经济实用的甲醛固定组织DNA提取方法。     

Maxwell 16裂解纯化法提取陈旧精子DNA的应用

目的利用Maxwell 16裂解纯化法从保存8年以上陈旧精斑检材中获取精子DNA。方法 8份陈旧精斑检材采用Maxwell 16裂解纯化法提取精子DNA,并采用Powerplex○R21试剂盒进行复合扩增,产物用AB3130型遗传分析仪检测,结果与常规方法进行对比。结果成功获得8份陈旧精斑检材精子STR分型。结论差异裂解配合Maxwell 16裂解在陈旧精斑检材精子DNA检验中效果明显。     

An investigation of two methods of DNA recovery from fired and unfired 9 mm ammunition

Cartridge cases are often recovered from crime scenes involving firearms and, in the United Kingdom (where gun possession is strictly controlled), these are commonly from 9 mm calibre ammunition. The ability to obtain informative DNA profiles from touch DNA on recovered cartridges could have a significant impact on the investigation of that type of offence. However, this avenue may not be routinely considered as investigators in the UK have historically had a low expectation of obtaining useful DNA profiles. This stance may not be unreasonable given that (a) only trace amounts of DNA are likely to have been transferred onto the cartridge cases through handling; and (b) when the cartridge is spent, the potential deterioration of that DNA caused by the act of discharging the weapon.We introduce a novel semi-automatable method using direct lysis for the recovery of DNA from ammunition and compare it with a traditional double-swabbing method (using wet and dry swabs). DNA profiling of the DNA recovered using both methods was carried out using the ESI17 FAST STR system (Promega). This demonstrated a significant increase in DNA recovery using the direct lysis approach, and correspondingly improved STR results.We also investigated the effect on the recovery and profiling of DNA from fired, and unfired, 9 mm cartridges using the direct lysis technique. These results demonstrate that DNA suitable for STR analysis can still be recovered from fired ammunition with only slightly reduced yields compared to unfired ammunition. In these experiments, the handler of the ammunition was most commonly either the sole contributor or the major contributor to the recovered DNA profile.     

3种骨骼DNA提取方法的应用效果比较

目的对3种方法提取骨骼DNA的效果进行比较,为实际应用中选择方法提供参考。方法应用骨骼孵化液法、DNA Investigator试剂盒法和CTAB法对同一骨骼样本进行脱钙、消化、提取DNA,用紫外分光光度计检测DNA的浓度值;使用Identifilerplus试剂盒进行PCR扩增,3130xl型遗传分析仪检测分型,并用SPSS 19.0软件对各项实验结果进行统计分析。结果 1g骨粉样本经上述3种方法提取,得到的DNA浓度分别为26.53ng/μL±5.47ng/μL、23.63ng/μL±4.56ng/μL、14.93ng/μL±3.88ng/μL;单因素方差分析表明3组数据之间差异性具有统计学意义。PCR扩增后电泳检测结果显示,骨骼孵化液法和DNA Investigator试剂盒法基因座检出率和峰值大致相同,均优于CTAB法。结论本文比较的3种方法均可用于骨骼样本的实际检案,检出率较高的两种方法可作为优选方案。     

应用磁珠法提取陈旧骨骼DNA

目的探讨采用磁珠法提取陈旧骨骼DNA的可行性。方法取经土埋或室外暴露下存放1~5年不等的10根长骨,经水洗、刮净,钻取骨密质骨粉3g,应用EQ1000磁珠试剂盒提取DNA,经复合扩增,ABI 3130XL基因分析仪电泳分离,进行STR分型检测。结果 10根长骨均获得完整的STR分型,电泳图谱基线干净,除个别大片段基因座外,等位基因荧光信号分布均衡性较好。结论采用磁珠法提取陈旧骨骼的DNA,能满足分型要求,可在实际检案中选用。     

两种方法提取汗潜手印DNA的比较研究

目的比较M48和DNeasy○R plant Mini两种方法提取汗潜手印DNA的优劣。方法用M48和DNeasy○Rplant Mini两种方法分别提取16对汗潜手印DNA,并进行DNA定量,比较定量结果。结果 M48法明显比plant Mini法提取到的DNA量多（配对t检验：α=0.05,t=3.45,γ=15,0.002     

纳米磁珠提取法在骨骼DNA提取中的应用

目的对纳米磁珠法提取纯化骨骼DNA的效果进行比较评价,为方法选择提供应用参考。方法取泥土掩埋、水中浸泡1~10年不等的25根长骨,经水洗、刮净,液氮冷冻研磨器将骨骼研磨成粉末状,分别应用纳米磁珠提取法和King Fisher仪器自动化提取法提取DNA,IdentifilerPlus试剂盒进行扩增,ABI 3100遗传分析仪进行STR分型检测;对两种方法提取的DNA定量和经扩增、分型检测的结果进行比较。结果骨骼样本采用纳米磁珠法提取到的样本DNA(1.237 5ng/μL±0.319 2ng/μL),较之King Fisher法的浓度(0.506 2ng/μL±0.280 5ng/μL)更高,两种方法间差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);而纳米磁珠法的分型成功率亦更高,两种方法间差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论用纳米磁珠提取纯化骨骼DNA,能得到高质量DNA模板,有利于提高分型检验的成功率,可在实际检案中选择使用。     

甲醛固定石蜡包埋组织DNA提取方法比较

目的比较甲醛固定石蜡包埋尸检组织中三种提取DNA的方法对DNA质量的影响,寻找一种操作简便、污染较少、经济实用的石蜡包埋组织中提取DNA的方法。方法选取经甲醛固定石蜡包埋的心肌组织20例,分别以二甲苯脱蜡-酚氯仿法、改良TES水浴脱蜡-酚氯仿法、试剂盒法提取DNA,进行电泳分析、紫外分光光度计测定A260/A280值及PCR扩增。结果改良TES水浴脱蜡-酚氯仿法抽提DNA法、二甲苯脱蜡-酚氯仿法分别与试剂盒法所提取DNA的A260/A280值相比较,均有显著性意义（P〈0.01）。二甲苯脱蜡-酚氯仿法、改良TES水浴脱蜡-酚氯仿法所提取DNA的A260/A280值相比较,无显著性意义（P〉0.05）。以改良TES水浴脱蜡-酚氯仿法所得DNA为模板,扩增的目的条带亮度与阳性对照相当。结论结果证实改良TES水浴脱蜡-酚氯仿法简便有效,所用试剂价格低廉,是一种经济实用的石蜡包埋组织DNA提取方法。     

Comparison of four DNA extraction methods to extract DNA from cigarette butts collected in Lebanon

Cigarette butts collected from crime scenes represent valuable sources of DNA. However the extraction of the genetic material may deem challenging especially when different contaminants may compromise the integrity, quality, and quantity of DNA obtained. This study aims at comparing four extraction methods (Chelex-100, soaking + Chelex-100, Chelex-100?+?PK, and DNA IQ? System) with the intention of identifying the one with maximal recovery rate and profiling success. DNA was extracted using aforementioned four methods from 70 cigarette butts collected from sites across Lebanon. DNA was quantified by qPCR using TaqMan Quantifiler Kit on an Applied Biosystems 7300 SDS instrument and genotypes were obtained using the PowerPlex® 21 kit on an Applied Biosystems 3130 Genetic Analyser. The findings of this work showed that DNA extraction with Chelex-100?+?PK is preferred to the other three methods when seeking both, a high yield and the generation of maximal numbers of full profiles. The Chelex-100?+?PK method is simple, cost effective, and therefore suitable for routine cigarette butts case studies.     

两种计数法预测叔侄关系的对比研究

目的对比等位基因全不同基因座及共有等位基因计数法预测叔侄关系的差异性、相似性及其效能,为侦破案件提供参考。方法以已知叔侄关系的204对作为实验组,无关个体的204对作为对照组,采用PowerPlex 21系统检测20个常染色体STR基因座,然后进行统计分析。结果设定等位基因全不同基因座数预测界值≤6个,发现叔侄关系的灵敏度为83.82%,特异性为74.02%,漏判率为8.82%,误判率为11.76%,系统效能为78.92%。共有等位基因数预测界值≥17个,发现叔侄关系的灵敏度为75.98%,特异性为77.45%,漏判率与误判率均为7.84%,系统效能为76.72%。结论等位基因全不同基因座计数法与共有等位基因数计数法有互补优势,联合应用能提高预测叔侄血亲关系的能力,对侦查具有良好的指导意义。     

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.     

A comparison of DNA collection and retrieval from two swab types (cotton and nylon flocked swab) when processed using three QIAGEN extraction methods

The Metropolitan Police Service currently uses cotton swabs to retrieve DNA for forensic profiling. Recently, a new nylon flocked swab type has become available from Copan (MicroRheologics, Brescia, Italy) that it is claimed, offers increased sample recovery and release yields. If true, the flocked swab may have important applications in DNA evidence retrieval. This study examines the DNA retrieval capability of cotton and nylon flocked swabs when extracted using three common extraction platforms (QIAcube, BioRobot EZ1 and manually processed QIAamp DNA investigator kit). Results indicate that both swab types are capable of recovering high percentages of DNA (>50%); however, the extraction platform selected was shown to have a significant effect upon DNA retrieval. Across all experiments, the cotton swab combined with the spin-column extractions was shown to be most effective, with the nylon swab and BioRobot EZ1 combination being the least effective. These findings illustrate the importance of extraction method selection.     

Optimization of DNA recovery from toothbrushes

In human identification, the victim's toothbrush is an invaluable personal item as the deposited cellular material contains DNA from which a reference profile can be produced. The profile obtained then allows direct comparison to be made with the profile from the unidentified body. This study was undertaken to determine the minimum number of bristle bundles that would generate a complete DNA profile. The minimum period of usage for a toothbrush to retain enough cells for genotyping was also investigated. We also tested two commonly used DNA extraction methods: QIAamp^® DNA Mini Kit and Chelex^® 100 to explore the efficiency of these protocols in recovering DNA from toothbrushes. In this experiment, volunteers brushed their teeth for 1, 7, 14, or 30 days. DNA was extracted from 5 and 10 bundles of bristles cut from the collected toothbrushes. The amount of DNA recovered was quantified by quantitative real-time PCR, and DNA genotyping was performed for each sample. Data revealed that QIAamp^® DNA Mini Kit performed better at yielding DNA in terms of purity, quantity, and quality than Chelex^® 100. It was also found that, with a suitable method of recovery, DNA samples from five bundles of bristles from all of the toothbrushes generated complete profiles. Based on the experimental results, a general guideline concerning the appropriate extraction method and the quantity of the starting material for the analysis of DNA from toothbrushes could be suggested.     

两种DNA提取法对签字笔上脱落细胞STR分型比较

目的比较Chelex-100法和硅珠法两种DNA提取法,在签字笔上附着微量脱落上皮细胞分型中的应用效果。方法 17名志愿者每人使用14支签字笔,每支笔每天使用20min,为期1个月,平均分为两组,分别保存1、3、5、7、14、21和28d,同时运用Chelex-100法和硅珠法两种方法提取签字笔上遗留微量脱落细胞中的DNA,用Identifiler复合扩增系统在AB I 3100遗传分析仪上对这些DNA样品进行STR分型,同时采集上述17名志愿者口腔拭子作为对照。结果以基因座检出个数为指标,使用后签字笔保存1、3、5、7、14、21和28d后,采用Chelex-100法和硅珠法两种方法提取DNA并进行分型检出的基因座个数相比差异均有统计学意义(P0.01);口腔拭子保存1、3、5、7、14、21和28d后,采用Chelex-100法和硅珠法两种方法提取DNA并进行分型检出的基因座个数相比差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论对于微量检材,应用硅珠法提取的DNA分型效果明显优于Chelex-100法,具有较高的应用价值,而在检材量比较多时区别不明显。     

A simple DNA extraction method for marijuana samples used in amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) analysis

As a first step in developing a molecular method for the individualization of marijuana samples, we evaluated a plant DNA extraction kit. The QIAGEN plant DNeasy method uses a spin column format for recovery of DNA and is effective for obtaining high molecular weight DNA from leaf, flower (bud), and seed samples of marijuana. The average DNA yield was 125-500 ng per 100 milligrams of fresh plant tissue. The recovered DNA was of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) quality as measured by the ability to generate reproducible amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) profiles. AFLP is a technique used to create a DNA profile for plant varieties and is being applied to marijuana samples by the authors to link growers and distributors of clonal material. The QIAGEN plant DNeasy method was simple, efficient, and reproducible for processing small quantities of marijuana into DNA.