Samsuwan Jarunya, Somboonchokepisal Thanutham, Akaraputtiporn Thunyathorn, Srimuang Tunwarut, Phuengsukdaeng Phuris, Suwannarat Aunchulee, Mutirangura Apiwat, Kitkumthorn Nakarin
Sub Division of Forensic Biochemistry, Institute of Forensic Medicine, Police General Hospital, Royal Thai Police, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10400, Thailand.
Biomed Rep. 2018 Nov;9(5):433-438. doi: 10.3892/br.2018.1148. Epub 2018 Sep 13.
With deceased and decayed bodies, personal identification is performed using hard tissue DNA, commonly extracted from bone. The quantity and quality of DNA used in the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification step is critical for a successful outcome. Since enamel is the strongest tissue in the human body, it was hypothesized that teeth may preserve DNA better than bones. In the present study, porcine teeth and bone samples were exposed to a variety of environments that imitated personal identification conditions, and DNA extracted from the teeth and bone samples was compared, using a PCR amplification method. The porcine teeth and bones were exposed to 11 different conditions for 5 different time periods to imitate a series of common crime scenes. DNA was extracted by a standard phenol-chloroform method. To test DNA quality, PCR was performed with primers designed to amplify porcine β-actin () and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences. The results demonstrated that the quality of DNA extracted from teeth was greater than that extracted from bone in the following environments: Buried in sand, soaked in caustic soda and burnt with rubber. By contrast, the quality of DNA extracted from bone was greater than that extracted from teeth when samples were buried in soil or submerged in water. There was no discernable difference in the quality of DNA extracted from bones and teeth in several environments, including being submerged in seawater, soaked in sulfuric acid, left in open air, and stored at 4, -20 and -80°C. Additionally, the results suggested that PCR using mtDNA primers performed better than that using ACTB primers. Finally, it was indicated that components of seawater may inhibit PCR amplification. The preliminary data reported here may provide basic guidelines for selecting the optimum source of DNA in each case.
对于已死亡和腐烂的尸体,使用通常从骨骼中提取的硬组织DNA进行个体识别。聚合酶链反应(PCR)扩增步骤中所用DNA的数量和质量对于获得成功结果至关重要。由于牙釉质是人体中最坚硬的组织,因此推测牙齿可能比骨骼更好地保存DNA。在本研究中,将猪牙和骨样本置于各种模拟个体识别条件的环境中,并使用PCR扩增方法比较从牙和骨样本中提取的DNA。将猪牙和骨置于11种不同条件下5个不同时间段,以模拟一系列常见犯罪现场。通过标准苯酚 - 氯仿法提取DNA。为了测试DNA质量,使用设计用于扩增猪β-肌动蛋白()和线粒体DNA(mtDNA)序列的引物进行PCR。结果表明,在以下环境中,从牙齿中提取的DNA质量高于从骨骼中提取的DNA质量:埋在沙子中、浸泡在苛性钠中以及与橡胶一起燃烧。相比之下,当样本埋在土壤中或浸入水中时,从骨骼中提取的DNA质量高于从牙齿中提取的DNA质量。在包括浸入海水中、浸泡在硫酸中、暴露在空气中以及储存在4℃、-20℃和-80℃的几种环境中,从骨骼和牙齿中提取的DNA质量没有明显差异。此外,结果表明使用mtDNA引物的PCR比使用ACTB引物的PCR表现更好。最后,表明海水成分可能会抑制PCR扩增。此处报告的初步数据可为每种情况下选择最佳DNA来源提供基本指导。