microRNA Detection in Blood,Urine, Semen,and Saliva Stains After Compromising Treatments

Evaluation of microRNA (miRNA) expression as a potential method for forensic body fluid identification has been the subject of investigation over the past several years. Because of their size and encapsulation within proteins and lipids, miRNAs are inherently less susceptible to degradation than other RNAs. In this work, blood, urine, semen, and saliva were exposed to environmental and chemical conditions mimicking sample compromise at the crime scene. For many treated samples, including 100% of blood samples, miRNAs remained detectable, comparable to the untreated control. Sample degradation varied by body fluid and treatment, with blood remarkably resistant, while semen and saliva are more susceptible to environmental insult. Body fluid identification using relative miRNA expression of blood and semen of the exposed samples was 100% and 94%, respectively. Given the overall robust results herein, the case is strengthened for the use of miRNAs as a molecular method for body fluid identification.     

Identification of Saliva Using MicroRNA Biomarkers for Forensic Purpose

In the forensic science community, microRNA (miRNA) profiling has started to be explored as an alternative tool for body fluid identification. Several origins of body fluid can be distinguished by measuring differential expression patterns of particular miRNAs. However, most of reported saliva miRNAs are nonoverlapping and debatable. The aim of this study was to develop a strategy of identifying saliva using miRNA biomarkers for forensic purpose. Eight miRNA candidates were selected to examine expression abundance in forensically relevant body fluids using hydrolysis probes quantitative real‐time PCR (TaqMan qPCR). Results revealed that none of them was truly saliva specific, and only miR‐200c‐3p, miR‐203a, and miR‐205‐5p were higher or more moderate expression in saliva. A stepwise strategy that combines each of three miRNAs with different body fluid‐specific miRNAs was developed, and three miRNA combinations could effectively differentiate saliva from other body fluids.     

Evaluation of two DNA/RNA co-extraction methods for body fluid identification in forensics

Body fluid identification has become a field of interest in forensic casework as it can add value to particular investigative scenarios. Identifying the source of the biological material is not always an upfront task using conventional methods; therefore, profiling of specific mRNA markers can provide the answer. The implementation of RNA based analyses in forensic casework must focus on the quality and sensitivity of methods, starting with nucleic acid extraction, and without loss of DNA for STR profiling. In this work, two methods for DNA and RNA co-extraction were tested and compared: a commercial kit that uses a spin, mini column methodology, and a quick, simple nucleic acid isopropanol precipitation based protocol. Both methods simultaneously extract DNA and RNA, crucial for forensic casework and were tested in semen samples. Nucleic acid quantifications as well as purity assessment ratios (OD₂₆₀/OD₂₃₀ and OD₂₆₀/OD₂₈₀) were obtained by both methods to infer on the use of extracts in downstream applications such as PCR. The performance of the two tested protocols was further evaluated by analyzing two semen mRNA specific markers, PRM1 and SEMG1. When compared to the commercially developed kit, results suggest that the literature adapted protocol allowed more carryover of contaminants absorbing at 230 nm and 280 nm as the purity ratios were below the accepted standard ranges. Negative results for mRNA profiling supported the QC results obtained by spectrophotometry. On the hand, PRM1 and SEGM1 were positive in RNA samples extracted with the commercial kit.     

microRNA的检测技术及其法医学应用前景

microRNA（miRNA）是一类由18～25个核苷酸构成的非编码小分子RNA，在转录后水平调控基因的表达。miRNA的表达具有高度保守性、时序性和组织特异性。随着其检测技术的逐渐成熟，miRNA被引入到法医学的研究中。新近研究表明，miRNA在法医学体液鉴定、种属鉴定和PMI推断等方面有一定的应用前景。本文简述miRNA检测技术的发展，并对其在法医学中的应用及前景进行综述，以期为相关研究及实践提供参考。     

Screening Biological Stains with qPCR versus Lateral Flow Immunochromatographic Test Strips: A Quantitative Comparison using Analytical Figures of Merit

Biological fluid identification is an important facet of evidence examination in forensic laboratories worldwide. While identifying bodily fluids may provide insight into which downstream DNA methods to employ, these screening techniques consume a vital portion of the available evidence, are usually qualitative, and rely on visual interpretation. In contrast, qPCR yields information regarding the amount and proportion of amplifiable genetic material. In this study, dilution series of either semen or male saliva were prepared in either buffer or female blood. The samples were subjected to both lateral flow immunochromatographic test strips and qPCR analysis. Analytical figures of merit—including sensitivity, minimum distinguishable signal (MDS) and limit of detection (LOD)—were calculated and compared between methods. By applying the theory of the propagation of random errors, LODs were determined to be 0.05 μL of saliva for the RSID? Saliva cards, 0.03 μL of saliva for Quantifiler^® Duo, and 0.001 μL of semen for Quantifiler^® Duo. In conclusion, quantitative PCR was deemed a viable and effective screening method for subsequent DNA profiling due to its stability in different matrices, sensitivity, and low limits of detection.     

Developmental Validation of RSID™-Saliva: A Lateral Flow Immunochromatographic Strip Test for the Forensic Detection of Saliva

Abstract:  Current methods for forensic identification of saliva generally assay for the enzymatic activity of α-amylase, an enzyme long associated with human saliva. Here, we describe the R apid S tain ID entification (RSID™-Saliva), a lateral flow immunochromatographic strip test that uses two antisalivary amylase monoclonal antibodies to detect the presence of salivary amylase, rather than the activity of the enzyme. We demonstrate that RSID™-Saliva is accurate, reproducible, and highly sensitive for human saliva; RSID™-Saliva detects less than 1 μL of saliva. The sensitivity of RSID^TM-Saliva allows investigators to sample a fraction of a questioned stain while retaining the majority for DNA-STR analysis. We demonstrate that RSID™-Saliva identifies saliva from a variety of materials (e.g., cans, bottles, envelopes, and cigarette-butts) and it does not cross-react with blood, semen, urine, or vaginal fluid. RSID™-Saliva is a useful forensic test for determining which evidentiary items contain saliva and thus may yield a DNA profile.     

Evaluation of Tamm‐Horsfall Protein and Uroplakin III for Forensic Identification of Urine

Abstract: In this study, Tamm‐Horsfall protein (THP), a major component of urinary protein, and uroplakin III (UPIII), a transmembrane protein widely regarded as a urothelium‐specific marker, were evaluated for forensic identification of urine by ELISA and/or immunohistochemistry. THP was detected in urine, but not in plasma, saliva, semen, vaginal fluid, or sweat by the simple ELISA method developed in this study. In addition, most aged urine stains showed positive results. The urine specificity of THP was confirmed by gene expression analysis. Therefore, as reported previously, ELISA detection of THP can be used as a presumptive test for urine identification. UPIII was specific for immunohistochemical staining of cells in centrifuged precipitate of urine. However, ELISA and RT‐PCR for UPIII were not specific for urine. UPIII may be applicable for forensic urine identification by immunohistochemistry.     

Developmental validation of RSID™-Semen: a lateral flow immunochromatographic strip test for the forensic detection of human semen

Abstract: Tests for the identification of semen commonly involve the microscopic visualization of spermatozoa or assays for the presence of seminal markers such as acid phosphatase (AP) or prostate‐specific antigen (PSA). Here, we describe the rapid stain identification kit for the identification of semen (RSID?‐Semen), a lateral flow immunochromatographic strip test that uses two antihuman semenogelin monoclonal antibodies to detect the presence of semenogelin. The RSID?‐Semen strip is specific for human semen, detecting <2.5 nL of semen, and does not cross‐react with other human or nonhuman tissues tested. RSID?‐Semen is more sensitive with certain forensic evidence samples containing mixtures of vaginal secretions and semen than either of the commercially available PSA‐based forensic semen detection tests or tests that measure AP activity that were tested in parallel. The RSID?‐Semen kit also allows sampling a fraction of a questioned stain while retaining the majority of the sample for further processing through short tandem repeat analysis.     

Messenger RNA Profiling for Forensic Body Fluid Identification： Research and Applications

Identifying the origin of body fluids left at a crime scene can give a significant insight into crime scene reconstruction by supporting a link betw een sample donors and actual criminal acts. How ev-er, the conventional body fluid identification methods are prone to various limitations, such as time con-sumption, intensive labor, nonparallel manner, varying degrees of sensitivity and limited specificity. Re-cently, the analysis of cell-specific messenger RNA expression （mRNA profiling） has been proposed to supplant conventional methods for body fluid identification. Since 2011, the collaborative exercises have been organized by the European DNA Profiling Group （EDNAP ） in order to evaluate the robustness and reproducibility of mRNA profiling for body fluid identification. The major advantages of mRNA profil-ing, compared to the conventional methods, include higher sensitivity, greater specificity, the ability of detecting several body fluids in one multiplex reaction, and compatibilitywith current DNA extraction and analysis procedure. In the current review ,we provided an overview of the present know ledge and detection methodologies of mRNA profiling for forensic body fluid identification and discussed its possi-ble practical application to forensic casew ork.     

A 1-year time course study of human RNA degradation in body fluids under dry and humid environmental conditions

Blood, saliva and semen are some of the forensically most relevant biological stains found at crime scenes. mRNA profiling is a reliable approach for the identification of the origin of an evidentiary trace. A stable set of markers and the knowledge about the effects of RNA degradation under different environmental conditions is necessary for the determination of an unknown biological stain. The aim of this work was to compare RNA degradation for human blood, semen and saliva at three different concentrations during a 1-year time period and exposed to dry and humid conditions. Also, this study addressed the question whether there are relevant differences in the efficiency of two RNA extraction methods.     

Applicability of two commercially available kits for forensic identification of saliva stains

The RSID-saliva test and the SALIgAE-saliva test are two recently developed forensic saliva detection kits. In this study, we compared the sensitivity and the specificity of the two test kits with the Phadebas amylase test by analyzing amylases from various sources including human, animals, plants, and micro-organism. The data demonstrate that the RSID-saliva test and the SALIgAE-saliva test offer higher sensitivity and specificity for the detection of saliva than the Phadebas amylase test. The detection limits of the RSID-saliva test, the SALIgAE-saliva test, and the Phadebas amylase test equate to 10, 4, and 1000 nL, respectively for human saliva. The RSID-saliva test and the SALIgAE-saliva test were further evaluated by analyzing semen, vaginal secretion, breast milk, blood, urine, sweat, and feces. The results of the two tests are in good agreement. The two tests reacted with urine, breast milk, and feces, but not with semen, vaginal secretion, blood, and sweat.     

The Use of Forensic Tests to Distinguish Blowfly Artifacts from Human Blood,Semen, and Saliva

This study investigated whether routinely used forensic tests can distinguish 3‐day‐old or 2‐week‐old fly artifacts, produced after feeding on human blood, semen, or saliva, from the biological fluid. Hemastix^®, Hemident^?, and Hemascein^? were unable to distinguish blood from artifacts. Hemastix^® returned false positives from negative controls. ABAcard^® Hematrace^® and Hexagon OBTI could distinguish blood from 3‐day‐old artifacts, but not 2‐week‐old artifacts. Phadebas^® and SALIgAE^® were unable to distinguish saliva from artifacts. RSID^?‐Saliva was able to distinguish saliva from 3‐day‐old artifacts, but not 2‐week‐old artifacts. Semen tests Seminal Acid Phosphatase, RSID^?‐Semen, and ABAcard^® p30 were all able to distinguish semen from 3‐day‐old artifacts, but not 2‐week‐old artifacts. The tests investigated cannot be relied upon to distinguish artifacts from biological fluids. However, if an artifact is identified by its morphology, a positive result may indicate which biological fluid the fly consumed, and this knowledge may prove useful for investigators searching for DNA.     

法医物证学miRNA分析的研究进展

在种属和体液鉴定及降解检材等特殊案件的分析时,转录水平的miRNA所具有的生物属性及表达特点,使其能够发挥基因组DNA所不具备的价值。本文通过概述法医物证学miRNA研究的现状,对法医miRNA分析的研究策略和法医物证学应用前景进行了综述,以期为法医miRNA分析的应用研究提供借鉴。     

The use of Polilight in the detection of seminal fluid, saliva, and bloodstains and comparison with conventional chemical-based screening tests

Biological stains can be difficult to detect at crime scenes or on items recovered from crime scenes. The use of a versatile light source may assist in their detection. The ability of Polilight to locate potential semen, saliva, and blood stains on a range of substrates and at different dilutions was tested. We also tested the use of Polilight in comparison with conventional chemical-based presumptive screening tests such as acid phosphatase (AP), Phadebas, and luminol, often used in casework for detecting potential semen, saliva, and blood stains, respectively. The Polilight was able to locate stains that were not apparent to the naked eye. The color of the material on which a stain is deposited can have an effect on the detectibility of the stain. The Polilight was found to be comparable with the AP and Phadebas tests in terms of its sensitivity. In a comparative study between the AP test and Polilight on 40 casework exhibits, one false-negative result was observed when using the Polilight. On a series of mock casework exhibits it was determined that the Polilight can be used successfully to locate saliva stains for DNA analysis. The sensitivity of luminol for detecting potential bloodstains was greater than that of Polilight; however the Polilight has particular application in instances where a bloodstain may have been concealed with paint. Overall, the Polilight is a relatively safe, simple, noninvasive, and nondestructive technique suitable for use in forensic casework.     

Messenger RNA profiling: a novel method for body fluid identification by real-time PCR

Conventional methods for the identification of different body fluids like blood, semen and saliva from biological stains involve immunological or enzymatic detection of certain proteins. In this study, we investigated potential RNA markers with the aim of developing Real-Time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based methods to allow differentiation between several body fluids. Total RNA samples from artificially stained swabs and from various pieces of evidence from case work were extracted, amplified and analyzed with several RNA markers. Three assays detecting the body fluids of interest were selected: hemoglobin-alpha locus 1 (HBA), kallikrein 3 (KLK) and mucin 4 (MUC). With this approach, we demonstrate that specific Real-Time PCR assays are useful in identifying the source of the biological stain. Furthermore, RNA profiling of various body fluids was even possible on samples stored over a long period of time at ambient temperature. The stability and sensitivity of the applied method outlines a novel application for Real-Time PCR within the forensic field.