• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

评估三种去除土壤的方法,以进行模拟法医地质学证据的环境 DNA 分析。

Assessing three soil removal methods for environmental DNA analysis of mock forensic geology evidence.

机构信息

Department of Population Health and Pathobiology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.

出版信息

J Forensic Sci. 2024 Jan;69(1):52-59. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.15399. Epub 2023 Oct 15.

DOI:10.1111/1556-4029.15399
PMID:37839019
Abstract

Soil is useful in criminal investigations as it is highly variable and readily transferred. Forensic geologists use several different techniques to removal soil from evidence prior to the analysis of inorganic components. There has been recent interest from the forensic science community to analyze environmental deoxyribonucleic acid (eDNA) associated with soil to augment existing forensic analyses. Notably however, limited research has been conducted to compare commonly used soil removal methods for downstream eDNA analysis. In this study, three soil removal methods were assessed: picking/scraping, sonication, and swabbing. Three mock evidence types (t-shirts, boot soles, and trowels) were sampled in triplicate with each removal method (n = 27). Soil samples underwent DNA isolation, quantification, and amplification of four genomic barcode regions: 16S for bacteria, ITS1 for fungi, ITS2 for plants, and COI for arthropods. Amplicons were prepared into libraries for DNA sequencing on an Illumina MiniSeq. DNA concentrations were highest in picked/scraped samples and were statistically significant compared with swabbed and sonicated samples. Amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) were identified, and removal methods had no impact on the recovery of the total number of target ASVs. Additionally, when assessing each sample in multidimensional space, picked/scraped samples tended to cluster separately from swabbed and sonicated samples. The soil core used a reference in this study also clustered with the picked/scraped samples, indicating that these samples may be more reflective of the communities collected from soil cores. Based on these data, we identified that picking/scraping is an acceptable soil removal method for eDNA analysis.

摘要

土壤在犯罪调查中很有用,因为它具有高度的可变性并且易于转移。法医地质学家使用几种不同的技术在分析无机成分之前从证据中提取土壤。最近,法医科学界有兴趣分析与土壤相关的环境脱氧核糖核酸 (eDNA),以补充现有的法医分析。然而,值得注意的是,对于常用的土壤去除方法用于下游 eDNA 分析的比较研究很少。在这项研究中,评估了三种土壤去除方法:挑取/刮取、超声处理和擦拭。三种模拟证据类型(t 恤、鞋底和抹子)分别用每种去除方法(n = 27)进行了三次采样。土壤样品经过 DNA 分离、定量和四个基因组条码区域的扩增:细菌的 16S、真菌的 ITS1、植物的 ITS2 和节肢动物的 COI。扩增子被制备成文库,用于在 Illumina MiniSeq 上进行 DNA 测序。挑取/刮取样本中的 DNA 浓度最高,与擦拭和超声处理样本相比具有统计学意义。鉴定了扩增子序列变体 (ASV),去除方法对目标 ASV 的总数没有影响。此外,当在多维空间中评估每个样本时,挑取/刮取的样本往往与擦拭和超声处理的样本分开聚类。本研究中使用的土壤芯也与挑取/刮取的样本聚类,表明这些样本可能更能反映从土壤芯中收集的群落。基于这些数据,我们确定挑取/刮取是 eDNA 分析中可接受的土壤去除方法。

相似文献

1
Assessing three soil removal methods for environmental DNA analysis of mock forensic geology evidence.评估三种去除土壤的方法,以进行模拟法医地质学证据的环境 DNA 分析。
J Forensic Sci. 2024 Jan;69(1):52-59. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.15399. Epub 2023 Oct 15.
2
Single Fragment or Bulk Soil DNA Metabarcoding: Which is Better for Characterizing Biological Taxa Found in Surface Soils for Sample Separation?单片段或整块土壤 DNA metabarcoding:对于用于样本分离的地表土壤中发现的生物分类群的特征描述,哪种方法更好?
Genes (Basel). 2019 Jun 6;10(6):431. doi: 10.3390/genes10060431.
3
A protocol for obtaining DNA barcodes from plant and insect fragments isolated from forensic-type soils.一种从法医类型土壤中分离出的植物和昆虫碎片获取DNA条形码的方案。
Int J Legal Med. 2018 Nov;132(6):1515-1526. doi: 10.1007/s00414-018-1772-1. Epub 2018 Feb 8.
4
Large-Scale Monitoring of Plants through Environmental DNA Metabarcoding of Soil: Recovery, Resolution, and Annotation of Four DNA Markers.通过土壤环境DNA代谢条形码对植物进行大规模监测:四种DNA标记的回收率、分辨率和注释
PLoS One. 2016 Jun 16;11(6):e0157505. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157505. eCollection 2016.
5
Optimization of the second internal transcribed spacer (ITS2) for characterizing land plants from soil.优化第二内转录间隔区(ITS2)用于从土壤中鉴定陆地植物。
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 16;15(4):e0231436. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231436. eCollection 2020.
6
Soil filtration-sedimentation improves shelled protist recovery in eukaryotic eDNA surveys.土壤过滤-沉淀可提高真核 DNA 调查中具壳原生生物的回收。
Mol Ecol Resour. 2023 Aug;23(6):1361-1371. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.13808. Epub 2023 May 8.
7
Finding the perfect pairs: A matchmaking of plant markers and primers for multi-marker eDNA metabarcoding.寻找完美配对:用于多标记 eDNA metabarcoding 的植物标记物和引物的匹配。
Mol Ecol Resour. 2024 May;24(4):e13937. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.13937. Epub 2024 Feb 16.
8
Groundwater environmental DNA metabarcoding reveals hidden diversity and reflects land-use and geology.地下水环境 DNA 宏条形码揭示了隐藏的多样性,并反映了土地利用和地质情况。
Mol Ecol. 2023 Jul;32(13):3497-3512. doi: 10.1111/mec.16955. Epub 2023 Apr 17.
9
Comparing diversity levels in environmental samples: DNA sequence capture and metabarcoding approaches using 18S and COI genes.比较环境样本中的多样性水平:使用 18S 和 COI 基因的 DNA 序列捕获和代谢组学方法。
Mol Ecol Resour. 2020 Sep;20(5):1333-1345. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.13201. Epub 2020 Jun 24.
10
Comprehensive biodiversity analysis via ultra-deep patterned flow cell technology: a case study of eDNA metabarcoding seawater.通过超深度图案流控技术进行综合生物多样性分析:以 eDNA 宏条形码海水分析为例。
Sci Rep. 2019 Apr 12;9(1):5991. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-42455-9.