Cargando…

Purification of crime scene DNA extracts using centrifugal filter devices

BACKGROUND: The success of forensic DNA analysis is limited by the size, quality and purity of biological evidence found at crime scenes. Sample impurities can inhibit PCR, resulting in partial or negative DNA profiles. Various DNA purification methods are applied to remove impurities, for example,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Norén, Lina, Hedell, Ronny, Ansell, Ricky, Hedman, Johannes
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3640930/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23618387
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2041-2223-4-8
_version_ 1782267947983568896
author Norén, Lina
Hedell, Ronny
Ansell, Ricky
Hedman, Johannes
author_facet Norén, Lina
Hedell, Ronny
Ansell, Ricky
Hedman, Johannes
author_sort Norén, Lina
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The success of forensic DNA analysis is limited by the size, quality and purity of biological evidence found at crime scenes. Sample impurities can inhibit PCR, resulting in partial or negative DNA profiles. Various DNA purification methods are applied to remove impurities, for example, employing centrifugal filter devices. However, irrespective of method, DNA purification leads to DNA loss. Here we evaluate the filter devices Amicon Ultra 30 K and Microsep 30 K with respect to recovery rate and general performance for various types of PCR-inhibitory crime scene samples. METHODS: Recovery rates for DNA purification using Amicon Ultra 30 K and Microsep 30 K were gathered using quantitative PCR. Mock crime scene DNA extracts were analyzed using quantitative PCR and short tandem repeat (STR) profiling to test the general performance and inhibitor-removal properties of the two filter devices. Additionally, the outcome of long-term routine casework DNA analysis applying each of the devices was evaluated. RESULTS: Applying Microsep 30 K, 14 to 32% of the input DNA was recovered, whereas Amicon Ultra 30 K retained 62 to 70% of the DNA. The improved purity following filter purification counteracted some of this DNA loss, leading to slightly increased electropherogram peak heights for blood on denim (Amicon Ultra 30 K and Microsep 30 K) and saliva on envelope (Amicon Ultra 30 K). Comparing Amicon Ultra 30 K and Microsep 30 K for purification of DNA extracts from mock crime scene samples, the former generated significantly higher peak heights for rape case samples (P-values <0.01) and for hairs (P-values <0.036). In long-term routine use of the two filter devices, DNA extracts purified with Amicon Ultra 30 K were considerably less PCR-inhibitory in Quantifiler Human qPCR analysis compared to Microsep 30 K. CONCLUSIONS: Amicon Ultra 30 K performed better than Microsep 30 K due to higher DNA recovery and more efficient removal of PCR-inhibitory substances. The different performances of the filter devices are likely caused by the quality of the filters and plastic wares, for example, their DNA binding properties. DNA purification using centrifugal filter devices can be necessary for successful DNA profiling of impure crime scene samples and for consistency between different PCR-based analysis systems, such as quantification and STR analysis. In order to maximize the possibility to obtain complete STR DNA profiles and to create an efficient workflow, the level of DNA purification applied should be correlated to the inhibitor-tolerance of the STR analysis system used.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3640930
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36409302013-05-02 Purification of crime scene DNA extracts using centrifugal filter devices Norén, Lina Hedell, Ronny Ansell, Ricky Hedman, Johannes Investig Genet Methodology BACKGROUND: The success of forensic DNA analysis is limited by the size, quality and purity of biological evidence found at crime scenes. Sample impurities can inhibit PCR, resulting in partial or negative DNA profiles. Various DNA purification methods are applied to remove impurities, for example, employing centrifugal filter devices. However, irrespective of method, DNA purification leads to DNA loss. Here we evaluate the filter devices Amicon Ultra 30 K and Microsep 30 K with respect to recovery rate and general performance for various types of PCR-inhibitory crime scene samples. METHODS: Recovery rates for DNA purification using Amicon Ultra 30 K and Microsep 30 K were gathered using quantitative PCR. Mock crime scene DNA extracts were analyzed using quantitative PCR and short tandem repeat (STR) profiling to test the general performance and inhibitor-removal properties of the two filter devices. Additionally, the outcome of long-term routine casework DNA analysis applying each of the devices was evaluated. RESULTS: Applying Microsep 30 K, 14 to 32% of the input DNA was recovered, whereas Amicon Ultra 30 K retained 62 to 70% of the DNA. The improved purity following filter purification counteracted some of this DNA loss, leading to slightly increased electropherogram peak heights for blood on denim (Amicon Ultra 30 K and Microsep 30 K) and saliva on envelope (Amicon Ultra 30 K). Comparing Amicon Ultra 30 K and Microsep 30 K for purification of DNA extracts from mock crime scene samples, the former generated significantly higher peak heights for rape case samples (P-values <0.01) and for hairs (P-values <0.036). In long-term routine use of the two filter devices, DNA extracts purified with Amicon Ultra 30 K were considerably less PCR-inhibitory in Quantifiler Human qPCR analysis compared to Microsep 30 K. CONCLUSIONS: Amicon Ultra 30 K performed better than Microsep 30 K due to higher DNA recovery and more efficient removal of PCR-inhibitory substances. The different performances of the filter devices are likely caused by the quality of the filters and plastic wares, for example, their DNA binding properties. DNA purification using centrifugal filter devices can be necessary for successful DNA profiling of impure crime scene samples and for consistency between different PCR-based analysis systems, such as quantification and STR analysis. In order to maximize the possibility to obtain complete STR DNA profiles and to create an efficient workflow, the level of DNA purification applied should be correlated to the inhibitor-tolerance of the STR analysis system used. BioMed Central 2013-04-24 /pmc/articles/PMC3640930/ /pubmed/23618387 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2041-2223-4-8 Text en Copyright © 2013 Norén et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Methodology
Norén, Lina
Hedell, Ronny
Ansell, Ricky
Hedman, Johannes
Purification of crime scene DNA extracts using centrifugal filter devices
title Purification of crime scene DNA extracts using centrifugal filter devices
title_full Purification of crime scene DNA extracts using centrifugal filter devices
title_fullStr Purification of crime scene DNA extracts using centrifugal filter devices
title_full_unstemmed Purification of crime scene DNA extracts using centrifugal filter devices
title_short Purification of crime scene DNA extracts using centrifugal filter devices
title_sort purification of crime scene dna extracts using centrifugal filter devices
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3640930/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23618387
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2041-2223-4-8
work_keys_str_mv AT norenlina purificationofcrimescenednaextractsusingcentrifugalfilterdevices
AT hedellronny purificationofcrimescenednaextractsusingcentrifugalfilterdevices
AT ansellricky purificationofcrimescenednaextractsusingcentrifugalfilterdevices
AT hedmanjohannes purificationofcrimescenednaextractsusingcentrifugalfilterdevices