Suppr超能文献

与传统采集方法相比,使用FTA纸可提高触摸DNA证据的回收率。

Increased recovery of touch DNA evidence using FTA paper compared to conventional collection methods.

作者信息

Kirgiz Irina A, Calloway Cassandra

机构信息

Forensic Science Graduate Program, University of California, Davis, 1909 Galileo Court, Suite B., Davis, CA 95618, USA.

Forensic Science Graduate Program, University of California, Davis, 1909 Galileo Court, Suite B., Davis, CA 95618, USA; Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute, Oakland, CA, USA.

出版信息

J Forensic Leg Med. 2017 Apr;47:9-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jflm.2017.01.007. Epub 2017 Jan 31.

Abstract

Tape lifting and FTA paper scraping methods were directly compared to traditional double swabbing for collecting touch DNA from car steering wheels (n = 70 cars). Touch DNA was collected from the left or right side of each steering wheel (randomized) using two sterile cotton swabs, while the other side was sampled using water-soluble tape or FTA paper cards. DNA was extracted and quantified in duplicate using qPCR. Quantifiable amounts of DNA were detected for 100% of the samples (n = 140) collected independent of the method. However, the DNA collection yield was dependent on the collection method. A statistically significant difference in DNA yield was observed between FTA scraping and double swabbing methods (p = 0.0051), with FTA paper collecting a two-fold higher amount. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in DNA yields between the double swabbing and tape lifting techniques (p = 0.21). Based on the DNA concentration required for 1 ng input, 47% of the samples collected using FTA paper would be expected to yield a short tandem repeat (STR) profile compared to 30% and 23% using double swabbing or tape, respectively. Further, 55% and 77% of the samples collected using double swabbing or tape, respectively, did not yield a high enough DNA concentration for the 0.5 ng of DNA input recommended for conventional STR kits and would be expected to result in a partial or no profile compared to 35% of the samples collected using FTA paper. STR analysis was conducted for a subset of the higher concentrated samples to confirm that the DNA collected from the steering wheel was from the driver. 32 samples were selected with DNA amounts of at least 1 ng total DNA (100 pg/μl when concentrated if required). A mixed STR profile was observed for 26 samples (88%) and the last driver was the major DNA contributor for 29 samples (94%). For one sample, the last driver was the minor DNA contributor. A full STR profile of the last driver was observed for 21 samples (69%) and a partial profile was observed for nine samples (25%); STR analysis failed for two samples collected using tape (6%). In conclusion, we show that the FTA paper scraping method has the potential to collect higher DNA yields from touch DNA evidence deposited on non-porous surfaces often encountered in criminal cases compared to conventional methods.

摘要

将胶带提起法和FTA试纸刮擦法与传统的双棉签擦拭法直接进行比较,用于从汽车方向盘(n = 70辆汽车)上收集触摸DNA。使用两根无菌棉签从每个方向盘的左侧或右侧(随机)收集触摸DNA,而另一侧则使用水溶性胶带或FTA试纸卡进行采样。使用qPCR对DNA进行提取和重复定量。无论采用何种方法,100%的样本(n = 140)均检测到可定量的DNA。然而,DNA的收集产量取决于收集方法。FTA刮擦法和双棉签擦拭法之间的DNA产量存在统计学显著差异(p = 0.0051),FTA试纸收集的DNA量高出两倍。统计分析表明,双棉签擦拭法和胶带提起法之间的DNA产量无显著差异(p = 0.21)。根据1 ng输入所需的DNA浓度,预计使用FTA试纸收集的样本中有47%会产生短串联重复序列(STR)图谱,而使用双棉签擦拭法或胶带分别为30%和23%。此外,使用双棉签擦拭法或胶带收集的样本中,分别有55%和77%的样本没有产生足够高的DNA浓度用于传统STR试剂盒推荐的0.5 ng DNA输入,预计与使用FTA试纸收集的35%的样本相比,会导致部分或无图谱。对一部分较高浓度的样本进行STR分析以确认从方向盘收集的DNA来自驾驶员。选择了32个样本,其总DNA量至少为1 ng(如有需要浓缩时为100 pg/μl)。26个样本(88%)观察到混合STR图谱,29个样本(94%)的最后一位驾驶员是主要DNA贡献者。对于一个样本,最后一位驾驶员是次要DNA贡献者。21个样本(69%)观察到最后一位驾驶员的完整STR图谱,9个样本(25%)观察到部分图谱;使用胶带收集的两个样本(6%)的STR分析失败。总之,我们表明,与传统方法相比,FTA试纸刮擦法有潜力从刑事案件中经常遇到的无孔表面上沉积的触摸DNA证据中收集更高产量的DNA。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验