Eficacia de 3 métodos de extracción de ADN a partir de restos óseos obtenidos de 3 contextos tafonómicos

Q3 Medicine
Lucero I. Portuguéz Ramírez , Dan E. Vivas-Ruiz , Roberto C. Parra Chinchilla , Nelson O. Rivera Fernández
{"title":"Eficacia de 3 métodos de extracción de ADN a partir de restos óseos obtenidos de 3 contextos tafonómicos","authors":"Lucero I. Portuguéz Ramírez ,&nbsp;Dan E. Vivas-Ruiz ,&nbsp;Roberto C. Parra Chinchilla ,&nbsp;Nelson O. Rivera Fernández","doi":"10.1016/j.reml.2022.11.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The extraction techniques of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) from old bone samples are based on the use of complex methodologies, which deal with the degradation of the sample, the low amount of DNA and the presence of inhibitors that can be extracted simultaneously.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To compare the efficiency in obtaining DNA from the methods: organic extraction, commercial kit and previous total demineralization, to obtain STR profiles of old bone samples from three taphonomic processes (alkaline, acid and moist mitotic).</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>29 skeletal remains from three different taphonomic contexts were processed: acidic, alkaline and wet-fungal. The amount of DNA obtained from three methodologies was evaluated in a comparative manner: organic extraction method (phenol-chloroform-isoamyl alcohol) (SO), extraction by silica column KIT QIAamp® DNA Investigator of QIAgen® (KC) and the methodology of extraction by previous total demineralization (DP). Finally, the obtaining of the STR profiles from the methodology of greater performance was tested.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The following quantification values were obtained: i) alkaline medium: 0.068 ± 0.07 ng/μL (SO), 0.021 ± 0.01ng/μL (KC) y 0.073 ± 0.052 ng/μL (DP); ii) acidic medium: 0.098 ± 0.064 ng/μL (SO), 0.041 ± 0.029 ng/μL (KC) y 0.068 ± 0.042 ng/μL; iii) Wet-mitotic medium: 0.25 ± 0.061 ng/μL (SO), 0.04 ± 0.027 ng/μL (KC) y 0.15 ± 0.072 ng/μL (DP). Likewise, using the DNA samples obtained by the SO method, complete profiles were obtained for the wet taphonomic context while the alkaline taphonomic process proved to be the most drastic for DNA degradation, presenting a greater number of incomplete profiles.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The methodology of organic extraction was optimal in obtaining DNA from the three taphonomic processes evaluated. On the other hand, the wet-fungal taphonomic process is the one that produces the least negative impact on the preservation of DNA from skeletal remains.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":35705,"journal":{"name":"Revista Espanola de Medicina Legal","volume":"49 3","pages":"Pages 91-100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Espanola de Medicina Legal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377473222000670","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The extraction techniques of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) from old bone samples are based on the use of complex methodologies, which deal with the degradation of the sample, the low amount of DNA and the presence of inhibitors that can be extracted simultaneously.

Objective

To compare the efficiency in obtaining DNA from the methods: organic extraction, commercial kit and previous total demineralization, to obtain STR profiles of old bone samples from three taphonomic processes (alkaline, acid and moist mitotic).

Materials and methods

29 skeletal remains from three different taphonomic contexts were processed: acidic, alkaline and wet-fungal. The amount of DNA obtained from three methodologies was evaluated in a comparative manner: organic extraction method (phenol-chloroform-isoamyl alcohol) (SO), extraction by silica column KIT QIAamp® DNA Investigator of QIAgen® (KC) and the methodology of extraction by previous total demineralization (DP). Finally, the obtaining of the STR profiles from the methodology of greater performance was tested.

Results

The following quantification values were obtained: i) alkaline medium: 0.068 ± 0.07 ng/μL (SO), 0.021 ± 0.01ng/μL (KC) y 0.073 ± 0.052 ng/μL (DP); ii) acidic medium: 0.098 ± 0.064 ng/μL (SO), 0.041 ± 0.029 ng/μL (KC) y 0.068 ± 0.042 ng/μL; iii) Wet-mitotic medium: 0.25 ± 0.061 ng/μL (SO), 0.04 ± 0.027 ng/μL (KC) y 0.15 ± 0.072 ng/μL (DP). Likewise, using the DNA samples obtained by the SO method, complete profiles were obtained for the wet taphonomic context while the alkaline taphonomic process proved to be the most drastic for DNA degradation, presenting a greater number of incomplete profiles.

Conclusions

The methodology of organic extraction was optimal in obtaining DNA from the three taphonomic processes evaluated. On the other hand, the wet-fungal taphonomic process is the one that produces the least negative impact on the preservation of DNA from skeletal remains.

从三种埋葬环境中获得的骨遗骸中提取dna的三种方法的有效性
从旧骨样品中提取脱氧核糖核酸(DNA)的技术是基于复杂方法的使用,这些方法涉及样品的降解,DNA的低量以及可以同时提取的抑制剂的存在。目的比较有机提取法、商品化试剂盒提取法和既往全脱矿法提取老骨标本碱法、酸法和湿法三种分离方法的DNA提取效率。材料和方法研究人员对来自三种不同环境的29具骨骼遗骸进行了处理:酸性、碱性和湿真菌。通过比较三种方法获得的DNA量进行评估:有机提取法(苯酚-氯仿-异戊醇)(SO)、QIAgen®公司的KIT QIAamp®DNA研究者(KC)硅胶柱提取和先前总脱矿法(DP)提取。最后,测试了从性能更高的方法中获得的STR配置文件。结果:1)碱性培养基:0.068±0.07 ng/μL (SO)、0.021±0.01ng/μL (KC)和0.073±0.052 ng/μL (DP);ii)酸性介质:0.098±0.064 ng/μL (SO)、0.041±0.029 ng/μL (KC)、0.068±0.042 ng/μL;iii)有丝分裂湿介质:0.25±0.061 ng/μL (SO), 0.04±0.027 ng/μL (KC)和0.15±0.072 ng/μL (DP)。同样,使用SO法获得的DNA样本,在湿法环境下可以获得完整的DNA图谱,而在碱性环境下DNA降解最为剧烈,呈现出更多的不完整的DNA图谱。结论有机提取法是三种分离方法中提取DNA的最佳方法。另一方面,湿真菌埋植过程是对骨骼遗骸DNA保存产生最小负面影响的过程。
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
Revista Espanola de Medicina Legal
Revista Espanola de Medicina Legal Medicine-Pathology and Forensic Medicine
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
41 days
×
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