Department of Forensic Dentistry, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan; Forensic Biology Unit, Scientific Crime Laboratory, Kanagawa Prefectural Police, 155-1 Yamashita-cho, Naka-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa, 231-0023, Japan.
Department of Forensic Dentistry, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan.
Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2019 Sep;42:103-112. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.06.016. Epub 2019 Jul 6.
Analyzing degraded evidence is an important challenge in forensic casework. Saliva remaining at a crime scene may deteriorate, due to various factors, making it difficult to identify. This study aims to clarify the efficacy of oral gram-positive and -negative bacterial DNA-based identification of saliva for analyzing highly degraded samples. Saliva samples were subjected to three different degradation treatments (heat denaturation: 40-80 °C in wet conditions; microbial decomposition: 1-5 days in humid soil; and ultraviolet (UV) irradiation: 0.01-1 J/cm). We compared saliva markers' detectability from the degraded samples-oral gram-positive bacterial DNA (Streptococcus salivarius and Streptococcus oralis), oral gram-negative bacterial DNA (Veillonella atypica and Prevotella maculosa) and salivary α-amylase. Oral bacterial DNA was detected using a melting curve analysis following real-time PCR. The efficacy of short tandem repeats (STR) and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) analyses were also compared. All oral bacterial DNA were detected with specific melting peaks from the heat-denatured samples, while neither catalytic nor immunochromatographic tests detected salivary α-amylase from the heat (80 °C) samples. The gram-positive bacterial DNA (S. salivarius and S. oralis) was detected from the microbial degradation (1-5 days) samples. In contrast, the gram-negative bacterial DNA (V. atypica and P. maculosa) and salivary α-amylase were not detected from samples treated for more than two days. UV exposure made bacterial DNA-based saliva identification difficult in a dose-dependent manner; however, UV irradiation did not influence protein-based saliva tests using salivary α-amylase as an indicator. As a result of STR and mtDNA typing, partial or null STR profiles were generated from the severely degraded (microbial (2-5 days) and UV (0.1-1 J/cm) degradation) samples, but full mtDNA profiles were obtained from all degraded samples. The forensic applicability of bacterial DNA test evaluated, using mock case samples, indicates that the oral gram-positive bacterial DNA was more resistant to degradation than the other markers. We conclude that the oral gram-positive bacterial DNA-based examination could be useful for identifying saliva from severely environmentally-exposed forensic samples as well as mtDNA typing.
分析降解证据是法医工作中的一个重要挑战。由于各种因素,留在犯罪现场的唾液可能会降解,从而难以识别。本研究旨在阐明基于口腔革兰氏阳性和革兰氏阴性细菌 DNA 的唾液鉴定方法在分析高度降解样本中的功效。唾液样本经过三种不同的降解处理(热变性:40-80°C 湿条件下;微生物分解:1-5 天潮湿土壤中;和紫外线 (UV) 照射:0.01-1 J/cm)。我们比较了降解样本中唾液标志物的可检测性-口腔革兰氏阳性细菌 DNA(唾液链球菌和口腔链球菌)、口腔革兰氏阴性细菌 DNA(异形韦荣球菌和中间普雷沃菌)和唾液α-淀粉酶。使用实时 PCR 后进行熔解曲线分析来检测口腔细菌 DNA。还比较了短串联重复序列 (STR) 和线粒体 DNA (mtDNA) 分析的效果。所有口腔细菌 DNA 均从热变性样本中检测到特定的熔解峰,而热(80°C)样本的催化和免疫层析试验均未检测到唾液α-淀粉酶。革兰氏阳性细菌 DNA(S. salivarius 和 S. oralis)从微生物降解(1-5 天)样本中检测到。相比之下,革兰氏阴性细菌 DNA(V. atypica 和 P. maculosa)和唾液α-淀粉酶未从处理超过两天的样本中检测到。紫外线照射以剂量依赖的方式使基于细菌 DNA 的唾液鉴定变得困难;然而,紫外线照射对以唾液α-淀粉酶为指示物的基于蛋白质的唾液检测没有影响。通过 STR 和 mtDNA 分型,从严重降解的(微生物(2-5 天)和 UV(0.1-1 J/cm)降解)样本中生成了部分或缺失 STR 图谱,但从所有降解样本中均获得了完整的 mtDNA 图谱。使用模拟案例样本评估的细菌 DNA 测试的法医学适用性表明,与其他标志物相比,口腔革兰氏阳性细菌 DNA 对降解的抵抗力更强。我们得出结论,基于口腔革兰氏阳性细菌 DNA 的检查可用于鉴定严重暴露于环境的法医样本中的唾液,以及 mtDNA 分型。