Department of Population Health and Pathobiology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.
J Forensic Sci. 2024 Jan;69(1):52-59. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.15399. Epub 2023 Oct 15.
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.
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。