Cargando…

Comparison of swab types for collection and analysis of microorganisms

The human microbiome has begun to emerge as a potential forensic tool, with varied applications ranging from unique identification to investigative leads that link individuals and/or locations. The relative abundance of the combined DNA of the microbiome, compared to human nuclear DNA, may expand po...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wise, Natalie M., Wagner, Sarah J., Worst, Travis J., Sprague, Jon E., Oechsle, Crystal M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8591448/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34964289
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mbo3.1244
_version_ 1784599237258903552
author Wise, Natalie M.
Wagner, Sarah J.
Worst, Travis J.
Sprague, Jon E.
Oechsle, Crystal M.
author_facet Wise, Natalie M.
Wagner, Sarah J.
Worst, Travis J.
Sprague, Jon E.
Oechsle, Crystal M.
author_sort Wise, Natalie M.
collection PubMed
description The human microbiome has begun to emerge as a potential forensic tool, with varied applications ranging from unique identification to investigative leads that link individuals and/or locations. The relative abundance of the combined DNA of the microbiome, compared to human nuclear DNA, may expand potential sources of biological evidence, especially in cases with transfer or low‐copy number DNA samples. This work sought to determine the optimal swab type for the collection and analysis of microorganisms. A bacterium (Proteus mirabilis) was deposited by pipette onto four swab types (cotton, flocked, dental applicators, and dissolvable), and extraction and real‐time PCR quantitation of the bacterial DNA were performed, which allowed for absolute microbial DNA recovery and comparison of yields across the four sampling substrates. Flocked swabs had the highest yield (~1240 ng) compared to the cotton swabs (~184 ng), dental applicators (~533 ng), and dissolvable swabs (~430 ng). The collection efficiency was further evaluated for cotton and flocked swabs using dried microbial samples spotted onto non‐porous surfaces (treated wood, glass, plastic, and tile). Flocked swabs performed consistently better across wood, glass, and tile, but showed decreased recovery from plastic. The cotton swabs failed in the recovery of P. mirabilis DNA across all surfaces. Knowing the appropriate sampling substrate will be useful as others continue to investigate the use of the microbiome as a forensics tool.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8591448
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85914482021-11-22 Comparison of swab types for collection and analysis of microorganisms Wise, Natalie M. Wagner, Sarah J. Worst, Travis J. Sprague, Jon E. Oechsle, Crystal M. Microbiologyopen Commentary The human microbiome has begun to emerge as a potential forensic tool, with varied applications ranging from unique identification to investigative leads that link individuals and/or locations. The relative abundance of the combined DNA of the microbiome, compared to human nuclear DNA, may expand potential sources of biological evidence, especially in cases with transfer or low‐copy number DNA samples. This work sought to determine the optimal swab type for the collection and analysis of microorganisms. A bacterium (Proteus mirabilis) was deposited by pipette onto four swab types (cotton, flocked, dental applicators, and dissolvable), and extraction and real‐time PCR quantitation of the bacterial DNA were performed, which allowed for absolute microbial DNA recovery and comparison of yields across the four sampling substrates. Flocked swabs had the highest yield (~1240 ng) compared to the cotton swabs (~184 ng), dental applicators (~533 ng), and dissolvable swabs (~430 ng). The collection efficiency was further evaluated for cotton and flocked swabs using dried microbial samples spotted onto non‐porous surfaces (treated wood, glass, plastic, and tile). Flocked swabs performed consistently better across wood, glass, and tile, but showed decreased recovery from plastic. The cotton swabs failed in the recovery of P. mirabilis DNA across all surfaces. Knowing the appropriate sampling substrate will be useful as others continue to investigate the use of the microbiome as a forensics tool. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8591448/ /pubmed/34964289 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mbo3.1244 Text en © 2021 The Authors. MicrobiologyOpen published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Commentary
Wise, Natalie M.
Wagner, Sarah J.
Worst, Travis J.
Sprague, Jon E.
Oechsle, Crystal M.
Comparison of swab types for collection and analysis of microorganisms
title Comparison of swab types for collection and analysis of microorganisms
title_full Comparison of swab types for collection and analysis of microorganisms
title_fullStr Comparison of swab types for collection and analysis of microorganisms
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of swab types for collection and analysis of microorganisms
title_short Comparison of swab types for collection and analysis of microorganisms
title_sort comparison of swab types for collection and analysis of microorganisms
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8591448/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34964289
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mbo3.1244
work_keys_str_mv AT wisenataliem comparisonofswabtypesforcollectionandanalysisofmicroorganisms
AT wagnersarahj comparisonofswabtypesforcollectionandanalysisofmicroorganisms
AT worsttravisj comparisonofswabtypesforcollectionandanalysisofmicroorganisms
AT spraguejone comparisonofswabtypesforcollectionandanalysisofmicroorganisms
AT oechslecrystalm comparisonofswabtypesforcollectionandanalysisofmicroorganisms