Purification of crime scene DNA extracts using centrifugal filter devices,

Abstract 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

A ranking index for quality assessment of forensic DNA profiles

Background Assessment of DNA profile quality is vital in forensic DNA analysis, both in order to determine the evidentiary value of DNA results and to compare the performance of different DNA analysis protocols. Generally the quality assessment is performed through manual examination of the DNA profiles based on empirical knowledge, or by comparing the intensities (allelic peak heights) of the capillary electrophoresis electropherograms. Results We recently developed a ranking index for unbiased and quantitative quality assessment of forensic DNA profiles, the forensic DNA profile index (FI) (Hedman et al. Improved forensic DNA analysis through the use of alternative DNA polymerases and statistical modeling of DNA profiles, Biotechniques 47 (2009) 951-958). FI uses electropherogram data to combine the intensities of the allelic peaks with the balances within and between loci, using Principal Components Analysis. Here we present the construction of FI. We explain the mathematical and statistical methodologies used and present details about the applied data reduction method. Thereby we show how to adapt the ranking index for any Short Tandem Repeat-based forensic DNA typing system through validation against a manual grading scale and calibration against a specific set of DNA profiles. Conclusions The developed tool provides unbiased quality assessment of forensic DNA profiles. It can be applied for any DNA profiling system based on Short Tandem Repeat markers. Apart from crime related DNA analysis, FI can therefore be used as a quality tool in paternal or familial testing as well as in disaster victim identification

Evaluation of amylase testing as a tool for saliva screening of crime scene trace swabs.

Amylase testing has been used as a presumptive test for crime scene saliva for over three decades, mainly to locate saliva stains on surfaces. We have developed a saliva screening application for crime scene trace swabs, utilising an amylase sensitive paper (Phadebas((R)) Forensic Press test). Positive results were obtained for all tested dried saliva stains (0.5-32muL) with high or intermediate amylase activity (840 and 290kU/L). Results were typically obtained within 5min, and all samples that produced DNA profiles were positive. However, salivary amylase activities, as well as DNA concentrations, vary significantly between individuals. We show that there is no correlation between amylase activity and amount of DNA in fresh saliva. Even so, a positive amylase result indicates presence of saliva, and thereby presence of DNA. Amylase testing may be useful for screening in investigations where the number of DNA analyses is limited due to cost, e.g., in volume crime

High-throughput DNA extraction of forensic adhesive tapes

Tape-lifting has since its introduction in the early 2000′s become a well-established sampling method in forensic DNA analysis. Sampling is quick and straightforward while the following DNA extraction is more challenging due to the “stickiness”, rigidity and size of the tape. We have developed, validated and implemented a simple and efficient direct lysis DNA extraction protocol for adhesive tapes that requires limited manual labour. The method uses Chelex beads and is applied with SceneSafe FAST tape. This direct lysis protocol provided higher mean DNA yields than PrepFiler Express BTA on Automate Express, although the differences were not significant when using clothes worn in a controlled fashion as reference material (p = 0.13 and p = 0.34 for T-shirts and button-down shirts, respectively). Through in-house validation we show that the method is fit-for-purpose for application in casework, as it provides high DNA yields and amplifiability, as well as good reproducibility and DNA extract stability. After implementation in casework, the proportion of extracts with DNA concentrations above 0.01 ng/μL increased from 71% to 76%. Apart from providing higher DNA yields compared with the previous method, the introduction of the developed direct lysis protocol also reduced the amount of manual labour by half and doubled the potential throughput for tapes at the laboratory. Generally, simplified manual protocols can serve as a cost-effective alternative to sophisticated automation solutions when the aim is to enable high-throughput DNA extraction of complex crime scene samples

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, 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