Abstract
When samples with low amounts of DNA are amplified using short tandem repeats (STRs), stochastic effects such as allele and locus dropout or drop-in, allele imbalance, and increased stutter often occur making data interpretation more difficult. The most common approach to improving STR results from low template samples is to increase the number of PCR cycles. Although more alleles may be recovered, stochastic effects may be exaggerated resulting in more complicated STR profiles. This work reports the effect of additional PCR cycles (29 vs. 30, 31, and 32) on STR success from environmentally challenged bone and tooth samples using the GlobalFiler® DNA Amplification Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). In addition, we compared the efficiency of two DNA extraction kits for skeletal samples: QIAamp® DNA Investigator (QIAGEN) and PrepFiler® BTA™ Forensic DNA Extraction (Thermo Fisher Scientific) kits. Results showed that more DNA was recovered from samples using the PrepFiler® BTA™ kit; but regardless of the extraction method, the number of alleles detected and the peak heights both increased with an increase in PCR cycle number. Although more alleles were reported in almost all samples, the most notable improvement was observed in samples with the DNA template < 120 pg. A general increase in the number of PCR artifacts was detected in STR profiles generated using 30–32 cycles. Overall, this study provides supporting evidence that STR profile completeness and quality may be improved when low template skeletal samples are amplified with extra PCR cycles (up to 32 cycles) using the GlobalFiler® DNA Amplification Kit.
References
Ghatak S, Muthukumaran RB, Nachimuthu SK (2013) A simple method of genomic DNA extraction from human samples for PCR-RFLP analysis. J Biomol Tech 24:224–231
Loreille OM, Diegoli TM, Irwin JA, Coble MD, Parsons TJ (2007) High efficiency DNA extraction from bone by total demineralization. Forensic Sci Int Genet 1:191–195
Miloš A, Selmanović A, Smajlović L, Huel RL, Katzmarzyk C, Rizvić A, Parsons TJ (2007) Success rates of nuclear short tandem repeat typing from different skeletal elements. Croat Med J 48:486–493
Lee HY, Park MJ, Kim NY, Sim JE, Yang WI, Shin K-J (2010) Simple and highly effective DNA extraction methods from old skeletal remains using silica columns. Forensic Sci Int Genet 4:275–280
Abuidrees AS, Alhamad NA, Alsaadany K (2016) A suitable method for dna extraction from bones for forensic applications: a case study. Arab J Forensic Sci Forensic Med 1:346–352
Hochmeister MN, Budowle B, Borer UV, Eggmann U, Comey CT, Dirnhofer R (1991) Typing of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) extracted from compact bone from human remains. J Forensic Sci 36:1649–1661
Gill P, Whitaker J, Flaxman C, Brown N, Buckleton J (2000) An investigation of the rigor of interpretation rules for STRs derived from less than 100 pg of DNA. Forensic Sci Int 112:17–40
Gill P (2001) Application of low copy number DNA profiling. Croat Med J 42:229–232
Whitaker JP, Cotton EA, Gill P (2001) A comparison of the characteristics of profiles produced with the AMPFlSTR® SGM Plus™ multiplex system for both standard and low copy number (LCN) STR DNA analysis. Forensic Sci Int 123:215–223
Forster L, Thomson J, Kutranov S (2008) Direct comparison of post-28-cycle PCR purification and modified capillary electrophoresis methods with the 34-cycle “low copy number”(LCN) method for analysis of trace forensic DNA samples. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2:318–328
Strom CM, Rechitsky S (1998) Use of nested PCR to identify charred human remains and minute amounts of blood. J Forensic Sci 43:696–700
Oh CS, Lee SJ, Lee SD, Kim MJ, Kim Y-S, Lim D-S, Shin DH (2013) Amplification of DNA remnants in mummified human brains from medieval Joseon tombs of Korea. Anthropol Anz 70:57–81
Irwin JA, Leney MD, Loreille O, Barritt SM, Christensen AF, Holland TD, Smith BC, Parsons TJ (2007) Application of low copy number STR typing to the identification of aged, degraded skeletal remains. J Forensic Sci 52:1322–1327
Kloosterman A, Kersbergen P (2003) Efficacy and limits of genotyping low copy number DNA samples by multiplex PCR of STR loci. International Congress Series. Elsevier, pp 795–798
Seo SB, Ge J, King JL, Budowle B (2014) Reduction of stutter ratios in short tandem repeat loci typing of low copy number DNA samples. Forensic Sci Int Genet 8:213–218
Ambers A, Turnbough M, Benjamin R, Gill-King H, King J, Sajantila A, Budowle B (2016) Modified DOP-PCR for improved STR typing of degraded DNA from human skeletal remains and bloodstains. Legal Med 18:7–12
Johnson BM, Kemp BM (2017) Rescue PCR: reagent-rich PCR recipe improves amplification of degraded DNA extracts. J Archaeol Sci Rep 11:683–694
McNevin D, Edson J, Robertson J, Austin JJ (2015) Reduced reaction volumes and increased Taq DNA polymerase concentration improve STR profiling outcomes from a real-world low template DNA source: telogen hairs. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 11:326–338
Cowen S, Debenham P, Dixon A, Kutranov S, Thomson J, Way K (2011) An investigation of the robustness of the consensus method of interpreting low-template DNA profiles. Forensic Sci Int Genet 5:400–406
Pajnič IZ, Debska M, Pogorelc BG, Mohorčič KV, Balažic J, Zupanc T, Štefanič B, Geršak K (2016) Highly efficient automated extraction of DNA from old and contemporary skeletal remains. J Forensic Legal Med 37:78–86
Rohland N, Hofreiter M (2007) Ancient DNA extraction from bones and teeth. Nat Protoc 2:1756–1762
Caragine T, Mikulasovich R, Tamariz J, Bajda E, Sebestyen J, Baum H, Prinz M (2009) Validation of testing and interpretation protocols for low template DNA samples using AmpFLSTR® Identifiler®. Croat Med J 50:250–267
Benschop CC, van der Beek CP, Meiland HC, van Gorp AG, Westen AA, Sijen T (2011) Low template STR typing: effect of replicate number and consensus method on genotyping reliability and DNA database search results. Forensic Sci Int Genet 5:316–328
Gittelson S, Steffen CR, Coble MD (2016) Expected net gain data of low-template DNA analyses. Data Brief 8:375–386
Gittelson S, Steffen CR, Coble MD (2016) Low-template DNA: a single DNA analysis or two replicates? Forensic Sci Int 264:139–145
Grisedale KS, van Daal A (2012) Comparison of STR profiling from low template DNA extracts with and without the consensus profiling method. Investig Genet 3:14
van Daal A (2010) LCN DNA analysis: limitations prevent ‘general acceptance’. Promega Corporation Web site
Butler J, Hill C (2010) Scientific issues with analysis of low amounts of DNA. Profiles DNA 13
Budowle B, Eisenberg AJ, van Daal A (2009) Low copy number typing has yet to achieve “general acceptance”. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Ser 2:551–552
Service CP (2008) Review of the use of Low Copy Number DNA analysis in current cases: CPS statement. http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/101_08.html
Caddy B, Taylor G, Linacre A (2008) A review of the science of low template DNA analysis. UK Home Office Report
QIAGEN (2012) QIAamp® DNA Investigator handbook
Scientific TF (2012) PrepFiler® and PrepFiler® BTA Forensic DNA Extraction Kits user guide
Scientific TF (2017) Quantifiler™ HP and Trio DNA Quantification Kits user guide
Scientific TF (2016) GlobalFiler™ PCR Amplification Kit user guide
TIBCO (2017) Statistica (data analysis software system). TIBCO Software Inc.
Moore D, Dowhan D (2002) Purification and concentration of DNA from aqueous solutions. Curr Protoc Mol Biol 2.1. 1-2.1. 10
Kemp BM, Monroe C, Smith DG (2006) Repeat silica extraction: a simple technique for the removal of PCR inhibitors from DNA extracts. J Archaeol Sci 33:1680–1689
Wikström P, Wiklund A, Andersson A-C, Forsman M (1996) DNA recovery and PCR quantification of catechol 2, 3-dioxygenase genes from different soil types. J Biotechnol 52:107–120
Lloyd KG, MacGregor BJ, Teske A (2010) Quantitative PCR methods for RNA and DNA in marine sediments: maximizing yield while overcoming inhibition. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 72:143–151
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Rachel Houston and Carrie Mayes for assistance with sample processing, and the Applied Anatomical Research Center (AARC) for providing the skeletal samples used in this study. Most importantly, we are grateful to those who donated their loved ones for scientific research. We would also like to thank Thermo Fisher Scientific for providing many of the reagents used in this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Harrel, M., Gangitano, D. & Hughes-Stamm, S. The effects of extra PCR cycles when amplifying skeletal samples with the GlobalFiler® PCR Amplification Kit. Int J Legal Med 133, 745–750 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-018-1860-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-018-1860-2