Cargando…
Comparison of preprocessing methods and storage times for touch DNA samples
AIM: To select appropriate preprocessing methods for different substrates by comparing the effects of four different preprocessing methods on touch DNA samples and to determine the effect of various storage times on the results of touch DNA sample analysis. METHOD: Hand touch DNA samples were used t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Croatian Medical Schools
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5346895/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28252870 http://dx.doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2017.58.4 |
_version_ | 1782513971572506624 |
---|---|
author | Dong, Hui Wang, Jing Zhang, Tao Ge, Jian-ye Dong, Ying-qiang Sun, Qi-fan Liu, Chao Li, Cai-xia |
author_facet | Dong, Hui Wang, Jing Zhang, Tao Ge, Jian-ye Dong, Ying-qiang Sun, Qi-fan Liu, Chao Li, Cai-xia |
author_sort | Dong, Hui |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: To select appropriate preprocessing methods for different substrates by comparing the effects of four different preprocessing methods on touch DNA samples and to determine the effect of various storage times on the results of touch DNA sample analysis. METHOD: Hand touch DNA samples were used to investigate the detection and inspection results of DNA on different substrates. Four preprocessing methods, including the direct cutting method, stubbing procedure, double swab technique, and vacuum cleaner method, were used in this study. DNA was extracted from mock samples with four different preprocessing methods. The best preprocess protocol determined from the study was further used to compare performance after various storage times. DNA extracted from all samples was quantified and amplified using standard procedures. RESULTS: The amounts of DNA and the number of alleles detected on the porous substrates were greater than those on the non-porous substrates. The performances of the four preprocessing methods varied with different substrates. The direct cutting method displayed advantages for porous substrates, and the vacuum cleaner method was advantageous for non-porous substrates. No significant degradation trend was observed as the storage times increased. CONCLUSION: Different substrates require the use of different preprocessing method in order to obtain the highest DNA amount and allele number from touch DNA samples. This study provides a theoretical basis for explorations of touch DNA samples and may be used as a reference when dealing with touch DNA samples in case work. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5346895 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Croatian Medical Schools |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53468952017-03-14 Comparison of preprocessing methods and storage times for touch DNA samples Dong, Hui Wang, Jing Zhang, Tao Ge, Jian-ye Dong, Ying-qiang Sun, Qi-fan Liu, Chao Li, Cai-xia Croat Med J Forensic Science AIM: To select appropriate preprocessing methods for different substrates by comparing the effects of four different preprocessing methods on touch DNA samples and to determine the effect of various storage times on the results of touch DNA sample analysis. METHOD: Hand touch DNA samples were used to investigate the detection and inspection results of DNA on different substrates. Four preprocessing methods, including the direct cutting method, stubbing procedure, double swab technique, and vacuum cleaner method, were used in this study. DNA was extracted from mock samples with four different preprocessing methods. The best preprocess protocol determined from the study was further used to compare performance after various storage times. DNA extracted from all samples was quantified and amplified using standard procedures. RESULTS: The amounts of DNA and the number of alleles detected on the porous substrates were greater than those on the non-porous substrates. The performances of the four preprocessing methods varied with different substrates. The direct cutting method displayed advantages for porous substrates, and the vacuum cleaner method was advantageous for non-porous substrates. No significant degradation trend was observed as the storage times increased. CONCLUSION: Different substrates require the use of different preprocessing method in order to obtain the highest DNA amount and allele number from touch DNA samples. This study provides a theoretical basis for explorations of touch DNA samples and may be used as a reference when dealing with touch DNA samples in case work. Croatian Medical Schools 2017-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5346895/ /pubmed/28252870 http://dx.doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2017.58.4 Text en Copyright © 2017 by the Croatian Medical Journal. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Forensic Science Dong, Hui Wang, Jing Zhang, Tao Ge, Jian-ye Dong, Ying-qiang Sun, Qi-fan Liu, Chao Li, Cai-xia Comparison of preprocessing methods and storage times for touch DNA samples |
title | Comparison of preprocessing methods and storage times for touch DNA samples |
title_full | Comparison of preprocessing methods and storage times for touch DNA samples |
title_fullStr | Comparison of preprocessing methods and storage times for touch DNA samples |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of preprocessing methods and storage times for touch DNA samples |
title_short | Comparison of preprocessing methods and storage times for touch DNA samples |
title_sort | comparison of preprocessing methods and storage times for touch dna samples |
topic | Forensic Science |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5346895/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28252870 http://dx.doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2017.58.4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT donghui comparisonofpreprocessingmethodsandstoragetimesfortouchdnasamples AT wangjing comparisonofpreprocessingmethodsandstoragetimesfortouchdnasamples AT zhangtao comparisonofpreprocessingmethodsandstoragetimesfortouchdnasamples AT gejianye comparisonofpreprocessingmethodsandstoragetimesfortouchdnasamples AT dongyingqiang comparisonofpreprocessingmethodsandstoragetimesfortouchdnasamples AT sunqifan comparisonofpreprocessingmethodsandstoragetimesfortouchdnasamples AT liuchao comparisonofpreprocessingmethodsandstoragetimesfortouchdnasamples AT licaixia comparisonofpreprocessingmethodsandstoragetimesfortouchdnasamples |