{"id":1311,"date":"2011-04-28T12:02:47","date_gmt":"2011-04-28T16:02:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/?p=1311"},"modified":"2015-12-08T09:50:28","modified_gmt":"2015-12-08T14:50:28","slug":"mukherjee-research-poster","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/news\/mukherjee-research-poster","title":{"rendered":"Research Day 2011 – Dishari Mukherjee – Comparison of Collection Devices and Commonly used Human Identification Kits for Forensic DNA Profiling of Soil-Inhibited Saliva-Skin Samples"},"content":{"rendered":"

Comparison of Collection Devices and Commonly used Human Identification Kits for Forensic DNA Profiling of Soil-Inhibited Saliva-Skin Samples<\/strong><\/p>\n

Biography: <\/strong>
\nDishari Mukherjee hails from Calcutta, India. She graduated in 2008 from Topiwala National Medical College, Bombay, India with a Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery degree. During her undergraduate years, she completed one and a half years of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology coursework. She is currently working towards her Master\u2019s Degree in Forensic Science at Marshall University, with emphases in DNA Analysis and Digital Forensics. <\/em>Her poster presentation is titled, \u201cComparison of Collection Devices and Commonly used Human Identification Kits for Forensic DNA Profiling of Soil-Inhibited Saliva-Skin Samples\u201d, based on the research she conducted during her summer internship. She <\/em>also gave a poster presentation on the same at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences\u2019 Annual Scientific Meeting, Chicago, 2011.<\/p>\n

Abstract:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Saliva deposited on skin can be an important source of DNA for profiling in Forensic Investigations.\u00a0 Unfortunately, human identification from saliva on skin can be challenging as failure to achieve a full-profile is known to result when environmental contaminants are co-collected with the saliva sample. Environmental contaminants present on victim skin surfaces may include soil and dust which are known to be PCR inhibitors.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The purpose of this study was to identify an optimal series of procedures capable of maximizing the probability of DNA recovery and fingerprinting from soil-contaminated, male saliva stains on female skin.\u00a0 This study made use of commercially-available kits and supplies typically used in Forensic DNA laboratories. The experiments were conducted after IRB approval for human research was obtained. Male saliva samples were applied to pre-measured areas of female skin. The testing samples were collected after allowing the saliva stain to properly dry.\u00a0 Two collection devices were tested: polyester tipped sterile cotton swabs (FisherBrand) and sample collection popules (Puritan).\u00a0 The double swab technique (wet and dry swabs, respectively) was used for collecting saliva samples with the swabs to maximize cell collection.\u00a0 Various concentrations of soil were added to a portion of the saliva-skin samples after collection. Two magnetic particle based DNA extraction kits: Promega\u2019s DNA IQ\u2122 and Applied Biosystem\u2019s (AB) Prepfiler\u2122 were compared on the basis of their performance in DNA recovery.\u00a0 Quantification was performed using AB Quantifiler\u00ae Duo DNA Quantification Kit on the AB 7500 Sequence Detection System v1.2.3.\u00a0 PCR amplification was conducted with two multiplex STR systems: AB\u2019s AmpF\u2113STR\u00ae Identifiler\u00ae PCR Amplification Kit and Promega\u2019s PowerPlex\u00ae 16 System, on the AB GeneAmp\u00ae PCR System 9700.\u00a0 The amplified products were separated on the AB 3130xl Genetic Analyzer.\u00a0 The data generated was analyzed using AB\u2019s GeneMapper\u00ae ID Software v3.2.1.\u00a0 Sample peak height, allelic dropout, and presence of artifacts were taken into consideration when making a determination of the best set of kits for generating DNA profiles of the aforementioned samples.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Our results indicate that there was no statistically significant difference between popules and swabs as collection devices. DNA IQ\u2122 gave more consistent results as compared to PrepFiler\u2122. Identifiler\u00ae outperformed PowerPlex\u00ae 16 in the presence of soil PCR Inhibitor. Thus, the recommended methodology for profiling of soil-contaminated male saliva on female skin, using kits and supplies commonly used in Forensic DNA labs, based on the present research, will be sample collection with cotton swabs using the \u201cDouble Swab\u201d collection technique, extraction using Promega\u2019s DNA IQ\u2122 DNA Extraction kit and amplification with AB AmpF\u2113STR\u00ae Identifiler\u00ae PCR Amplification Kit.<\/p>\n

Poster:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"Comparison<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

REFERENCES:<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Pang BCM, Cheung BKK, Double swab technique for collecting touched evidence, Legal Medicine 9, 2007, 181\u2013184.<\/li>\n
  2. Sweet DJ, Lorente M, Lorente JA, Valenzuela A and Villanueva E, <\/em>An Improved Method to Recover Saliva from Human Skin: The Double Swab Technique, Journal of <\/em>Forensic Sciences, 42 (2), 1997, 320-22.<\/li>\n
  3. \u00a0Evelyn Anzai-Kanto ,M\u00e1rio Hiroyuki Hirata, Rosario Dominguez\u00a0 Crespo Hirata, Fabio Daumas Nunes, Rodolfo Francisco Haltenhoff Melani,\u00a0 Rog\u00e9rio Nogueira Oliveira, DNA extraction from human saliva deposited on skin and its use in forensic identification procedures, Braz Oral Res, 19(3), 2005, 216-22.<\/li>\n
  4. John W. Bond, Christine Hammond, The Value of DNA Material Recovered from Crime Scenes, J Forensic Sci, 53 (4), 2008, 797-801.<\/li>\n
  5. Chris Collopy, Mini-Popule Developed to Maximize DNA Recovery for Robotic Forensic Analysis, Forensic Magazine, http:\/\/www.forensicmag.com, 2008.<\/li>\n
  6. Kim Windram, Scott Miller, Denise Ward, Ted Silenieks and Julianne Henry,\u00a0 Comparison of Swab Types for the recover of trace DNA in Forensic Investigations,\u00a0 Evidence Recovery and Biology Analytical Groups, Biology Report R73, Government of South Australia, 2005.<\/li>\n
  7. Applied Biosystems, PrepFiler\u2122 Forensic DNA Extraction Kit, User Guide, Part # 4390932 Rev. 01, 2008.<\/li>\n
  8. Applied Biosystems, PrepFiler\u2122 Forensic DNA Extraction Kit, Product Bulletin Human Identification, 2008.<\/li>\n
  9. Promega, DNA IQ\u2122 System- Small Sample Casework Protocol, Technical Bulletin, Part # TB296, 2009.<\/li>\n
  10. Promega, PowerPlex\u00ae 16 System, Technical Manual, Part #TMD012, 2008.<\/li>\n
  11. Applied Biosystems, AmpF\u2113STR\u00ae Identifiler\u00ae PCR Amplification Kit, User\u2019s Manual, Part # 4323291, 2006.<\/li>\n
  12. Applied Biosystems, Quantifiler\u00ae Duo DNA Quantification Kit, User\u2019s Manual, Part #4391294, 2008.<\/li>\n
  13. Silva RHA, Musse JO, Melani RFH, Oliveira RN, Human bite mark identification and DNA technology in forensic dentistry, Braz J Oral Sci., 5,\u00a0 2006, 1193-7.<\/li>\n
  14. Sutlovic D, Gamulin S, Definis-Gojanovic M, Gugic D, Andjelinovic S, Interaction of humic acids with human DNA: proposed mechanisms and kinetics, Electrophoresis, 29(7), 2008, 1467-72.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Comparison of Collection Devices and Commonly used Human Identification Kits for Forensic DNA Profiling of Soil-Inhibited Saliva-Skin Samples Biography: Dishari Mukherjee hails from Calcutta, India. She graduated in 2008 from Topiwala National Medical College, Bombay, India with a Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery degree. During her undergraduate years, she completed one and a<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":120,"featured_media":1312,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,5],"tags":[150,113,120],"class_list":["post-1311","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","category-research","tag-research","tag-research-day-2011","tag-students"],"acf":[],"fimg_url":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/files\/2011\/04\/Mukherjee.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1311","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/120"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1311"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1311\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1312"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1311"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1311"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marshall.edu\/forensics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1311"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}