Chelex法和两种磁珠法提取接触DNA效果的比较

目的比较Chelex法、DNA IQ磁珠法、EQ国产磁珠法对接触DNA的提取效果。方法将稀释为10ng、100ng的标准品DNA,分别采用Chelex法、DNA IQ磁珠法、EQ国产磁珠法处理;对30例烟蒂和30例牙刷分别采用Chelex法、DNA IQ磁珠法和EQ国产磁珠法提取DNA,然后进行PCR定量和STR检测。结果Chelex法对DNA的提取无损失,DNA IQ磁珠法、EQ国产磁珠法对DNA的提取均有不同程度的损失;烟蒂、牙刷等检材采用Chelex法提取的接触DNA量和IPC CT值显著高于IQ磁珠法、EQ国产磁珠法,但STR检验成功率却低于IQ磁珠法、EQ国产磁珠法。2种磁珠法提取的DNA量、IPC CT值和STR检验成功率无显著性差异。结论污染轻、杂质少的接触DNA检材,用Chelex法提取最为方便快捷;IQ磁珠法、EQ国产磁珠法更适合污染接触DNA检材的提取及自动化操作。     

国产磁珠结合自动化工作站批量提取生物检材DNA的应用

目的建立国产磁珠结合自动化工作站批量提取案件中生物检材DNA的方法。方法采用国产磁珠结合Bio-Robert Universal System自动化工作站对案件中常见的生物样本进行DNA提取,检测Identifiler系统16个STR基因座,在ABI3130XL遗传分析仪上进行STR分型。其中210份样品同时在ABI7500型荧光定量PCR仪上进行定量。结果9100份10类生物检材应用国产磁珠结合自动化工作站,大部分可提取到足够的DNA进行STR检验。STR检验成功率最高的为口腔拭子、肌肉,达100%,接触细胞检材的成功率较低,为50.0%。结论国产磁珠结合自动化工作站可用于案件中常见的大部分生物样本的DNA提取。     

人体接触检材前处理方式对磁珠法提取DNA效果的影响

目的比较3种常见的接触检材前处理方式对磁珠法提取DNA效果的影响。方法收集烟蒂、牙刷、纱线手套各10份;分别采用95℃、70℃直接裂解和TNE、SDS、PK预消化方式进行前处理,再用磁珠法提取纯化DNA,并进行DNA定量,统计提取的接触DNA量和IPC CT值;同时用Sinofiler复合扩增系统进行STR分型检测。结果 3种方法前处理后用磁珠提取的DNA纯度均较高I,PC CT值在26.63～27.19之间。用预消化法获得的DNA量高于裂解法,而95℃裂解与70℃裂解方法提取的DNA量无显著性差异。STR扩增检测结果亦表明,采用预消化法处理的样品STR分型成功率高于裂解法9,5℃与70℃裂解方法处理的样品STR分型成功率无显著性差异。结论人体接触检材采用预消化磁珠法提取DNA,有助于提高STR检验成功率。     

微量口腔脱落细胞检材的DNA检验

目的寻求提高微量口腔脱落细胞检材的DNA检验成功率的简便有效的提取方法。方法对不同载体上的100份微量口腔脱落细胞检材采用小体积Chelex-100法提取DNA,在ABI7500型荧光定量PCR仪上进行定量,同时用IdentifilerTM复合扩增系统扩增,在ABI3130遗传分析仪上进行STR分型。结果从25根饮料吸管上提取的DNA量在0.72～116.7.8ng,16个水杯杯缘提取的DNA量在2.15-142.5ng,31个饮料瓶(罐)口提取的DNA量在1～34.65ng,10根筷子上提取的DNA量在3.35～26.6ng,12个果核中提取的DNA量在0.294～21.4ng,6份吃剩的骨头中提取的DNA量在0.88～5.88ng。100份检材性别及9个以上STR位点分型成功率平均为59.38%。除了使用者的个人原因外,检材的提取送检方式、检材的质地、饮料的性质对提取的DNA量有显著影响,是否加蛋白酶K对提取的DNA量无显著影响。结论采用小体积Chelex-100法可对60%左右的微量口腔脱落细胞检材提取DNA进行STR分型。     

浓缩DNA法结合miniSTR分型技术检验微量DNA

目的优化低拷贝数DNA STR分型方法。方法对采用磁珠法或Chelex-100法提取DNA,Identi-filer试剂盒扩增,未获得分型结果的日常检案检材,采用物理浓缩法或过柱浓缩法浓缩DNA,采用miniFilerTM试剂盒再次扩增分型。结果 127例检材中,47例磁珠法提取DNA未获得分型的样品,分型成功率为36%;80例Chelex-100法提取DNA未获分型的样品,分型成功率为30%。结论采用浓缩法和miniFilerTM试剂盒,可以提高日常检案中低拷贝数检材的STR检验分型成功率。     

磁珠法自动化纯化现场检材DNA方法研究

目的利用TE-MAGS在TECAN工作站上结合磁珠试剂盒,建立自动化工作站批量纯化现场检材DNA的方法,并探讨其在法医物证检案中的应用。方法灵敏度测试:标准品使用0.1ng/μL 9947A,用200μL TES稀释制备DNA总量0.1ng~1ng共10种的标准样品,采用本文方法提取纯化,使用IdentifilerTM试剂盒扩增,用3130XL型测序仪检测,Gene Mapper ID-X分析,分析STR图谱质量;纯化能力测试:在1ng总量的标准样品中加入腐殖酸、血红素,采用本文方法提取纯化、扩增检测,分析STR图谱质量;实际案件应用对比:收集304份现场检材,分别采用本方法和硅珠法进行提取纯化,经扩增检测,统计对比两种提取纯化方法 STR分型成功率。结果灵敏度测试:0.1ng~0.2ng总量标准样品提取的DNA模板,扩增后可检测到部分基因座STR图谱,0.3ng~1ng总量标准样品提取的DNA模板,扩增后可以得到完整的STR图谱;纯化能力测试:对混合有一定浓度的腐殖酸、血红素的标准样品的提取产物检测图谱未见明显抑制;实际案件应用对比测试:304份现场检材工作站磁珠法检出成功率(50%)高于硅珠法(40.8%)。结论本文所建立的方法缓冲范围较大,回收率高,纯化能力强,提取产物STR分型成功率高,适合现场检材批量化DNA检验。     

DNase-I纯化结合碱性裂解法提取混合斑精子DNA

目的研究脱氧核糖核酸酶I(DNase-I)纯化结合碱性裂解法提取混合斑精子DNA的方法在法医学中的应用。方法收集79份性犯罪案件混合斑检材,分别用DNase-I纯化结合碱性裂解法和差异裂解法提取精子DNA,采用STR荧光标记复合扩增体系进行16个STR基因座分型,并比较检验结果。结果应用DNase-I纯化结合碱性裂解法提取精子DNA,64例检材分型成功;应用差异裂解法提取精子DNA,57例检材分型成功;两种方法比较结果存在显著性差异(P=0.039),DNase-1纯化结合碱性裂解法提取精子DNA的STR分型成功率更高,成本低廉。结论DNase-I纯化结合碱性裂解法提取混合斑精子DNA可提高检验成功率,操作简便,快速,易于自动化,适于法医学个体识别鉴定。     

DNase-Ⅰ纯化结合碱性裂解法提取混合斑精子DNA

目的研究脱氧核糖核酸酶I(DNase-I)纯化结合碱性裂解法提取混合斑精子DNA的方法在法医学中的应用。方法收集79份性犯罪案件混合斑检材,分别用DNase-I纯化结合碱性裂解法和差异裂解法提取精子DNA,采用STR荧光标记复合扩增体系进行16个STR基因座分型,并比较检验结果。结果应用DNase-I纯化结合碱性裂解法提取精子DNA,64例检材分型成功;应用差异裂解法提取精子DNA,57例检材分型成功;两种方法比较结果存在显著性差异(P=0.039),DNase-1纯化结合碱性裂解法提取精子DNA的STR分型成功率更高,成本低廉。结论DNase-I纯化结合碱性裂解法提取混合斑精子DNA可提高检验成功率,操作简便,快速,易于自动化,适于法医学个体识别鉴定。     

Chelex-100法提取脱落细胞检材DNA的实时定量研究

目的研究脱落细胞检材DNA检验的简便有效的提取方法。方法对76份包括帽子、眼镜、牙刷、剃须刀、梳子、口香糖、羊水在内的7种脱落细胞检材采用Chelex-100法提取DNA,在ABI7500型荧光定量PCR仪上进行定量,同时用Identifiler复合扩增系统扩增,在ABI3130遗传分析仪上进行STR分型。结果从帽子（头套）中获得的脱落细胞DNA平均含量为8.31ng,眼镜擦拭物上获得的脱落细胞DNA平均含量为6.20ng,牙刷上获得的脱落细胞DNA平均含量为49.40ng,剃须刀擦拭物上获得的脱落细胞DNA平均含量为6.92ng、梳子擦拭物上获得的的脱落细胞DNA平均含量为10.68ng,口香糖的脱落细胞DNA平均含量为16.30ng,羊水的脱落细胞DNA平均含量为320ng。以上76份检材性别及10个以上STR位点分型成功率为75.8%。结论从帽子、眼镜、牙刷、剃须刀、梳子、口香糖、羊水等检材提取的脱落细胞可用Chelex-100法提取DNA作STR分型。     

Chelex-100提取生物检材DNA实时PCR定量研究

目的研究Chelex-100法提取的生物检材DNA用量与复合STR分型成功率的关系。方法113份各种生物检材采用Chelex-100法提取DNA，应用Quantifiler人类DNA定量试剂盒在ABI 7500荧光定量PCR仪上进行实时PCR定量，同时用Identifiler复合扩增系统在ABI 3100遗传分析仪上对这些DNA样品进行STR分型。结果各种生物检材提取的DNA浓度分别为：37份滤纸、纱布血痕0．042～5．28ng／μl，16份口腔拭子1．15—4．21ng／μl，18份烟头0．016～1．46ng／μl，10份肋软骨0．531—14．40ng／μl，8份肌肉5．75—24．80ng／μl，7份指甲0．788—11．50ng／μl，17份精斑0．79～99．50ng／μl。在建立的8μl扩增体系中，根据上述结果，调整用于复合STR扩增的DNA模板量在0．5—3ng之间，大部分样品可获得完全的STR分型。结论Chelex-100法提取的检材DNA模板用量在0．5—3ng之间可得到有效STR扩增，浓度为0．5ng／μl以上的DNA样品，用小体积模板（1μl）比大体积（3μl）模板扩增效果好。     

Efficiency of Casework Direct Kit for extraction of touch DNA samples obtained from cars steering wheels

Analysis of STR profiles obtained from touch DNA has been very useful to the elucidation of crimes. Extraction method may be determinant for the recovery of genetic material collected from different surfaces. Vehicle theft is one of the most common crimes in São Paulo city, Brazil, but collection of biological traces in car steering wheels is not considered, because of the belief that profiles generated won’t be able to identify the thief, only the owner. This study aimed to analyze the efficacy of extraction methods for obtaining DNA profiles in samples collected from steering wheels. Eight criminal acts were simulated with 2 different individuals each (mixture of victim and thief), in duplicate, in order to compare two extraction methods: DNA IQ™ and Casework Direct Kit (both Promega Corporation). Genetic material was collected by double swab method and quantified by Quantifiler™Trio (ThermoFisher Scientific). Amplification was conducted with PowerPlex® Fusion System (Promega). It was possible to obtain STR profiles for all experiments. The mixtures were compared with reference profiles to evaluated how many alleles of each donor were observed. Samples extracted with Casework Direct Kit obtained STR profiles with higher averages of alleles for primary and secondary donors (88.7% and 59.9%, respectively) than those extracted with DNA IQ™ (60.4% and 38.1%, respectively). This could be explained by the differences established in the protocols of both methods, since DNA IQ™ is based on successive washes and can result in loss of DNA, whereas Casework Direct Kit minimizes this problem. We concluded that Casework Direct Kit was more efficient for processing touch DNA samples than DNA IQ™.     

96孔过滤板在接触性DNA自动化检验中的应用

目的将96孔过滤板用于自动化工作站,对接触性DNA进行检验。方法收集553份现场提取的附着在烟蒂、饮料瓶、门窗把手、电源网线头、作案工具、手套上的微量接触性生物检材,在96孔过滤板上进行裂解后整体离心,分离载体与裂解液;应用自动化核酸提取纯化仪结合M48磁珠纯化试剂盒提取纯化DNA,采用IdentifilerPlus试剂盒进行扩增,3500XL测序仪电泳分型,ID-X专家系统分析结果。结果在553份检材中,成功获得STR分型的有271份,检验成功率在31.6%~97.3%之间,烟蒂、饮料瓶检材的成功率均在90%以上,提取纯化过程约90min。结论将96孔过滤板用于自动化工作站,可在实现批量接触性DNA的快速、自动化提取的同时,有效提高接触性DNA检出率。     

4种固相颗粒吸附法提取滤纸血痕DNA效果的比较

目的探讨4种固相颗粒吸附法提取滤纸血痕样本DNA的效果。方法含有1μL静脉血的滤纸血痕180份,分为4组,每组45份。分别采用4种固相颗粒吸附法(DNAIQ~(TM)系统、D盾超敏DNA提取试剂盒、超高效硅珠纯化DNA提取试剂盒和常规的硅珠法)对上述样本进行DNA提取,对比各组DNA溶液的浓度及STR分型检验结果。结果 D盾超敏DNA提取试剂盒[(3.764±1.790)μg/mL]、超高效硅珠纯化DNA提取试剂盒(3.634±1.112)及常规硅珠法(3.350±1.250)提取到DNA溶液的浓度无统计学差异(P0.05),但均高于DNA IQ~(TM)系统(1.864±1.207)(P0.001);D盾超敏DNA提取试剂盒、超高效硅珠纯化DNA提取试剂盒及常规硅珠法样本图谱峰高大于DNA IQ~(TM)系统(P0.001),超高效硅珠纯化DNA提取试剂盒和常规硅珠法样本图谱峰高大于D盾超敏DNA提取试剂盒(P0.01)。结论 D盾超敏DNA提取试剂盒、超高效硅珠纯化DNA提取试剂盒及常规硅珠法对于滤纸血痕的DNA提取效率高于DNA IQ~(TM)系统;超高效硅珠纯化DNA提取试剂盒和常规硅珠提取到的DNA溶液可能具有更高的质量。     

2种陈旧骨骼、牙齿DNA纯化方法的比较

目的比较有机法+QIAquick纯化法和DNA IQ磁珠法对陈旧骨骼和牙齿DNA的纯化效果。方法选择10份陈旧骨骼和12份牙齿样本,进行消化后分别采用有机法+QIAquick纯化法和DNA IQ磁珠法进行提取纯化,进行DNA定量后用SinofilerTM试剂盒进行检测。结果 2种方法纯化的骨骼、牙齿DNA的IPC CT值无显著差异。有机法+QIAquick纯化法纯化的骨骼、牙齿DNA平均浓度分别为0.180ng/μL±0.068ng/μL和0.132ng/μL±0.027ng/μL,所有样品均获得全部基因分型。DNA IQ磁珠法纯化的DNA平均浓度分别为0.038ng/μL±0.028ng/μL和0.036ng/μL±0.007ng/μL,有5份骨骼和6份牙齿样本仅获得部分基因分型或未能分型。结论有机法+QIAquick纯化法对陈旧骨骼、牙齿DNA的纯化效果优于DNA IQ磁珠法。     

STR Profiles from DNA Samples with "Undetected" or Low Quantifiler™ Results

Abstract:  Screening methods capable of identifying DNA samples that will not yield short tandem repeat (STR) profiles are desired. In the past, quantitation methods have not been sensitive enough for this purpose. In this study, low level DNA samples were used to assess whether Quantifiler™ has a minimum quantitation value below which STR profiles would consistently fail to be detected. Buccal swabs were obtained and the DNA extracted, quantified, and serially diluted to concentrations ranging from 0.002 to 0.250 ng/μL. Samples were analyzed once with Quantifiler™, followed by Profiler Plus™ amplification and capillary electrophoresis analysis. An absolute minimum value below which STR results were unobtainable could not be defined. From the 96 low level samples tested, STR loci (including one full profile) were successfully amplified and detected from 27% of the samples "undetected" by Quantifiler™. However, no STR alleles were detected in 73% of these "undetected" samples, indicating that Quantifiler™ data may be useful for predicting STR typing success.     

Efficiency of DNA IQ System in recovering semen DNA from cotton swabs

With the aim to asses the efficiency of the DNA IQ System in the recovery of DNA from semen samples, cotton swabs were prepared from 1/5 serial dilutions of semen. Each swab was fractionated in four equivalent quarters and the DNA was further extracted following the differential lysis protocol. The recovered DNA was quantified by means of real time PCR and the average DNA yield was used to compare results. Direct extractions of equivalent aliquots of each semen dilution were used as reference samples. Even though a high percentage of the starting material was lost during the process of transfer to/recover from the solid support, our experimental results demonstrated that the DNA IQ system was able to detect around 10³ sperm cells in the starting material, enabling to obtain a complete DNA profile with AmpFl STR IdentiFiler PCR Amplification Kit (Applied Biosystems).     

Successful STR and SNP typing of FTA Card samples with low amounts of DNA after DNA extraction using a Qiagen BioRobot EZ1 Workstation

FTA Cards (GE Healthcare) have been used for more than 4 years in Denmark for the collection of buccal cells as reference samples in crime cases. Semi-automated protocols for STR typing of DNA on punches of FTA Cards are routinely used. In average, full STR profiles were generated from approximately 95% of the FTA Cards with a standard punching protocol, while partial or no STR profile were obtained from 5% of the samples. Here, the Qiagen BioRobot^® EZ1 Workstation (Qiagen) and the EZ1 DNA Investigator Kit (Qiagen) was used to extract DNA from 29 FTA Cards from which a complete STR profile was not generated with the standard punching protocol. All 29 samples were successfully typed with the AmpF?STR^® Identifiler™ PCR Amplification Kit (Applied Biosystems) and with the SNPforID 49plex SNP assay. The lowest amount of DNA that resulted in complete STR and SNP profiles was 80 pg. The STR and SNP profiles were identical to those generated from another sample collected from each of the 29 individuals.     

PE‐Swab Direct STR Amplification of Forensic Touch DNA Samples

The PE‐Swab direct STR amplification workflow was developed to process low‐level “touch DNA” samples. In this workflow, a forensic sample is first collected on a 4‐mm PE‐Swab (a novel sample collection device); two 2‐mm punches containing collected samples are then generated from the PE‐Swab and directly amplified for STR typing. Compared to the conventional STR workflow, which involves DNA extraction, purification, and elution volume reduction, the PE‐Swab direct STR amplification workflow does not require sample preparation and takes <60 sec before a touch sample is ready for STR amplification. Because there is no DNA loss due to sample preparation, the PE‐Swab workflow is more sensitive than the conventional STR workflow. The average peak height per sample obtained by the PE‐swab workflow is 3 times higher than that from the conventional workflow with both low‐level single source and two‐contributor mixture samples tested in this study.