Two simplified tooth sample preparation methods for conventional laboratory and RapidHIT™ ID workflows

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, LEGAL
Morgan Eaton BS, M. Shane Woolf PhD, Samyuktha Pemmasani, Triniti Turner BS, Janina Golob Deeb DMD, MS, Tracey Dawson Green PhD
{"title":"Two simplified tooth sample preparation methods for conventional laboratory and RapidHIT™ ID workflows","authors":"Morgan Eaton BS,&nbsp;M. Shane Woolf PhD,&nbsp;Samyuktha Pemmasani,&nbsp;Triniti Turner BS,&nbsp;Janina Golob Deeb DMD, MS,&nbsp;Tracey Dawson Green PhD","doi":"10.1111/1556-4029.15624","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Disaster victim identification (DVI) refers to the forensic identification of unknown individuals following a mass disaster event. Human dental structures can contain viable DNA sources when other soft tissues are compromised. However, labor-intensive sample preparation performed by extensively trained personnel is needed to expose the nuclear material for traditional forensic DNA workflows. With this in mind, we evaluated two simplified sample preparation protocols for processing tooth samples using either a conventional forensic DNA workflow or the Applied Biosystems® RapidHIT™ ID instrument. Briefly, sample sets for both protocols included 10 deciduous teeth that were cleaned prior to either fragmentation with a claw hammer (for RapidHIT™ ID processing) or fine-powder pulverization with a consumer-grade coffee grinder (for traditional workflows). The average percentage of expected STR alleles that were detected above analytical threshold for these tooth samples were comparable between methods: RapidHIT™ ID = 99.0% and GlobalFiler™ = 99.8%. Average intralocus heterozygote peak height ratios (PHRs) were comparable: RapidHIT™ ID = 0.80 and GlobalFiler™ = 0.86. Importantly, 9 of 10 samples analyzed via the RapidHIT™ ID required analyst review for flagged artifact peaks and quality issues. Across all profiles, 91% of alleles passed quality metrics for the RapidHIT™ workflow versus 100% for conventional GlobalFiler™ analysis. Collectively, these results suggest that quick, low-tech tooth sample fragmentation followed by analysis with the RapidHIT™ ID instrument can produce complete STR profiles from aged tooth samples. Future studies should include larger samples sets, more challenging tooth samples, and further simplification of sample preparation to enable field-forward, on-scene DVI.</p>","PeriodicalId":15743,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1556-4029.15624","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1556-4029.15624","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Disaster victim identification (DVI) refers to the forensic identification of unknown individuals following a mass disaster event. Human dental structures can contain viable DNA sources when other soft tissues are compromised. However, labor-intensive sample preparation performed by extensively trained personnel is needed to expose the nuclear material for traditional forensic DNA workflows. With this in mind, we evaluated two simplified sample preparation protocols for processing tooth samples using either a conventional forensic DNA workflow or the Applied Biosystems® RapidHIT™ ID instrument. Briefly, sample sets for both protocols included 10 deciduous teeth that were cleaned prior to either fragmentation with a claw hammer (for RapidHIT™ ID processing) or fine-powder pulverization with a consumer-grade coffee grinder (for traditional workflows). The average percentage of expected STR alleles that were detected above analytical threshold for these tooth samples were comparable between methods: RapidHIT™ ID = 99.0% and GlobalFiler™ = 99.8%. Average intralocus heterozygote peak height ratios (PHRs) were comparable: RapidHIT™ ID = 0.80 and GlobalFiler™ = 0.86. Importantly, 9 of 10 samples analyzed via the RapidHIT™ ID required analyst review for flagged artifact peaks and quality issues. Across all profiles, 91% of alleles passed quality metrics for the RapidHIT™ workflow versus 100% for conventional GlobalFiler™ analysis. Collectively, these results suggest that quick, low-tech tooth sample fragmentation followed by analysis with the RapidHIT™ ID instrument can produce complete STR profiles from aged tooth samples. Future studies should include larger samples sets, more challenging tooth samples, and further simplification of sample preparation to enable field-forward, on-scene DVI.

Abstract Image

两种简化的牙齿样本制备方法,适用于传统实验室和 RapidHIT™ ID 工作流程。
灾难受害者身份鉴定(DVI)是指对大规模灾难事件后的未知人员进行法医鉴定。当其他软组织受到破坏时,人类牙齿结构中可能含有可行的 DNA 来源。然而,传统的法医 DNA 工作流程需要经过广泛培训的人员进行劳动密集型样本制备,以暴露核材料。有鉴于此,我们评估了使用传统法医 DNA 工作流程或 Applied Biosystems® RapidHIT™ ID 仪器处理牙齿样本的两种简化样本制备方案。简而言之,两种方案的样本集都包括 10 颗乳牙,在用爪锤破碎(用于 RapidHIT™ ID 处理)或用消费级咖啡研磨机细粉粉碎(用于传统工作流程)之前都要进行清洁。在这些牙齿样本中,检测到的高于分析阈值的预期 STR 等位基因的平均百分比在不同方法之间具有可比性:RapidHIT™ ID = 99.0% 和 GlobalFiler™ = 99.8%。病灶内杂合峰高比 (PHR) 平均值相当:RapidHIT™ ID = 0.80 和 GlobalFiler™ = 0.86。重要的是,在通过 RapidHIT™ ID 分析的 10 个样本中,有 9 个样本需要分析师对标记的伪峰和质量问题进行审查。在所有图谱中,RapidHIT™ 工作流程有 91% 的等位基因通过了质量指标检测,而传统 GlobalFiler™ 分析的等位基因通过率为 100%。总之,这些结果表明,快速、低技术含量的牙齿样本破碎,然后使用 RapidHIT™ ID 仪器进行分析,可以从陈旧的牙齿样本中得到完整的 STR 图谱。未来的研究应包括更大的样本集、更具挑战性的牙齿样本,并进一步简化样本制备,以实现现场直接 DVI。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of forensic sciences
Journal of forensic sciences 医学-医学:法
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
215
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Forensic Sciences (JFS) is the official publication of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS). It is devoted to the publication of original investigations, observations, scholarly inquiries and reviews in various branches of the forensic sciences. These include anthropology, criminalistics, digital and multimedia sciences, engineering and applied sciences, pathology/biology, psychiatry and behavioral science, jurisprudence, odontology, questioned documents, and toxicology. Similar submissions dealing with forensic aspects of other sciences and the social sciences are also accepted, as are submissions dealing with scientifically sound emerging science disciplines. The content and/or views expressed in the JFS are not necessarily those of the AAFS, the JFS Editorial Board, the organizations with which authors are affiliated, or the publisher of JFS. All manuscript submissions are double-blind peer-reviewed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信