Suppr超能文献

用于STR分析的从人类骨骼遗骸中分离DNA的两种方法的比较。

Comparison of two methods for isolating DNA from human skeletal remains for STR analysis.

作者信息

Rucinski Cynthia, Malaver Ayda L, Yunis Emilio J, Yunis Juan J

机构信息

Grupo de identificación Humana e Inmunogenética, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia.

出版信息

J Forensic Sci. 2012 May;57(3):706-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.02012.x. Epub 2011 Dec 28.

Abstract

The quality and efficiency of a standard organic DNA isolation method and a silica-based method using the QIAGEN Blood Maxi Kit were compared to obtain human DNA and short tandem repeats (STRs) profiles from 39 exhumed bone samples for paternity testing. DNA samples were quantified by real-time PCR, and STR profiles were obtained using the AmpFlSTR(®) Identifiler(®) PCR amplification kit. Overall, the silica-based method recovered less DNA ranging from 0 to 147.7 ng/g (average 7.57 ng/g, median = 1.3 ng/g) than did the organic method ranging from 0 to 605 ng/g (average 44.27 ng/g, median = 5.8 ng/g). Complete profiles (16/16 loci tested) were obtained from 37/39 samples (95%) using the organic method and from 9/39 samples (23%) with the silica-based method. Compared with a standard organic DNA isolation method, our results indicate that the published silica-based method does not improve neither the quality nor the quantity of DNA for STR profiling.

摘要

为了从39份用于亲子鉴定的挖掘出的骨样本中获取人类DNA和短串联重复序列(STRs)图谱,对一种标准有机DNA提取方法和使用QIAGEN Blood Maxi试剂盒的基于硅胶的方法的质量和效率进行了比较。通过实时PCR对DNA样本进行定量,并使用AmpFlSTR(®) Identifiler(®) PCR扩增试剂盒获得STR图谱。总体而言,与有机方法相比,基于硅胶的方法回收的DNA较少,范围为0至147.7 ng/g(平均7.57 ng/g,中位数 = 1.3 ng/g),有机方法回收的DNA范围为0至605 ng/g(平均44.27 ng/g,中位数 = 5.8 ng/g)。使用有机方法从37/39个样本(95%)中获得了完整图谱(检测16/16个位点),而基于硅胶的方法从9/39个样本(23%)中获得了完整图谱。与标准有机DNA提取方法相比,我们的结果表明,已发表的基于硅胶的方法在用于STR分析时,既没有提高DNA的质量也没有提高其数量。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验