Literature DB >> 33484330

Towards developing forensically relevant single-cell pipelines by incorporating direct-to-PCR extraction: compatibility, signal quality, and allele detection.

Nidhi Sheth1, Harish Swaminathan2, Amanda J Gonzalez3, Ken R Duffy4, Catherine M Grgicak5,6,7.   

Abstract

Current analysis of forensic DNA stains relies on the probabilistic interpretation of bulk-processed samples that represent mixed profiles consisting of an unknown number of potentially partial representations of each contributor. Single-cell methods, in contrast, offer a solution to the forensic DNA mixture problem by incorporating a step that separates cells before extraction. A forensically relevant single-cell pipeline relies on efficient direct-to-PCR extractions that are compatible with standard downstream forensic reagents. Here we demonstrate the feasibility of implementing single-cell pipelines into the forensic process by exploring four metrics of electropherogram (EPG) signal quality-i.e., allele detection rates, peak heights, peak height ratios, and peak height balance across low- to high-molecular-weight short tandem repeat (STR) markers-obtained with four direct-to-PCR extraction treatments and a common post-PCR laboratory procedure. Each treatment was used to extract DNA from 102 single buccal cells, whereupon the amplification reagents were immediately added to the tube and the DNA was amplified/injected using post-PCR conditions known to elicit a limit of detection (LoD) of one DNA molecule. The results show that most cells, regardless of extraction treatment, rendered EPGs with at least a 50% true positive allele detection rate and that allele drop-out was not cell independent. Statistical tests demonstrated that extraction treatments significantly impacted all metrics of EPG quality, where the Arcturus® PicoPure™ extraction method resulted in the lowest median allele drop-out rate, highest median average peak height, highest median average peak height ratio, and least negative median values of EPG sloping for GlobalFiler™ STR loci amplified at half volume. We, therefore, conclude the feasibility of implementing single-cell pipelines for casework purposes and demonstrate that inferential systems assuming cell independence will not be appropriate in the probabilistic interpretation of a collection of single-cell EPGs.

Keywords:  Direct-to-PCR; Forensic DNA; Forensic DNA Mixtures; Human identification; Single-cell forensic DNA

Year:  2021        PMID: 33484330     DOI: 10.1007/s00414-021-02503-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Legal Med        ISSN: 0937-9827            Impact factor:   2.686


  38 in total

1.  EuroForMix: An open source software based on a continuous model to evaluate STR DNA profiles from a mixture of contributors with artefacts.

Authors:  Øyvind Bleka; Geir Storvik; Peter Gill
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 4.882

2.  The interpretation of single source and mixed DNA profiles.

Authors:  Duncan Taylor; Jo-Anne Bright; John Buckleton
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2013-06-28       Impact factor: 4.882

3.  Testing likelihood ratios produced from complex DNA profiles.

Authors:  Duncan Taylor; John Buckleton; Ian Evett
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2015-01-17       Impact factor: 4.882

4.  GHEP-ISFG collaborative exercise on mixture profiles (GHEP-MIX06). Reporting conclusions: Results and evaluation.

Authors:  P A Barrio; M Crespillo; J A Luque; M Aler; C Baeza-Richer; L Baldassarri; E Carnevali; P Coufalova; I Flores; O García; M A García; R González; A Hernández; V Inglés; G M Luque; A Mosquera-Miguel; S Pedrosa; M L Pontes; M J Porto; Y Posada; M I Ramella; T Ribeiro; E Riego; A Sala; V G Saragoni; A Serrano; S Vannelli
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2018-05-18       Impact factor: 4.882

5.  Determination of the possible number of genotypes which can contribute to DNA mixtures: Non-computer assisted deconvolution should not be attempted for greater than two person mixtures.

Authors:  Phillip C Lynch; Robin W Cotton
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2018-09-13       Impact factor: 4.882

6.  Contributors are a nuisance (parameter) for DNA mixture evidence evaluation.

Authors:  K Slooten; A Caliebe
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2018-05-12       Impact factor: 4.882

7.  CEESIt: A computational tool for the interpretation of STR mixtures.

Authors:  Harish Swaminathan; Abhishek Garg; Catherine M Grgicak; Muriel Medard; Desmond S Lun
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 4.882

8.  Production of high-fidelity electropherograms results in improved and consistent DNA interpretation: Standardizing the forensic validation process.

Authors:  Kelsey C Peters; Harish Swaminathan; Jennifer Sheehan; Ken R Duffy; Desmond S Lun; Catherine M Grgicak
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2017-09-08       Impact factor: 4.882

9.  Validating TrueAllele® DNA mixture interpretation.

Authors:  Mark W Perlin; Matthew M Legler; Cara E Spencer; Jessica L Smith; William P Allan; Jamie L Belrose; Barry W Duceman
Journal:  J Forensic Sci       Date:  2011-08-09       Impact factor: 1.832

10.  Development and validation of open-source software for DNA mixture interpretation based on a quantitative continuous model.

Authors:  Sho Manabe; Chie Morimoto; Yuya Hamano; Shuntaro Fujimoto; Keiji Tamaki
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-17       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  2 in total

1.  Precision DNA Mixture Interpretation with Single-Cell Profiling.

Authors:  Jianye Ge; Jonathan L King; Amy Smuts; Bruce Budowle
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2021-10-20       Impact factor: 4.096

Review 2.  New Perspectives for Whole Genome Amplification in Forensic STR Analysis.

Authors:  Richard Jäger
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-06-25       Impact factor: 6.208

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.