dnatrack is a work in progress — updates ship daily. Report a bug or request a feature →

Comparison of different methods of DNA recovery and PCR amplification in STR profiling of casings—a retrospective study.

International Journal of Legal Medicine, 2018

Study Design

Addressed Question

Success of STR profiling from firearm casings comparing different sampling and amplification methods

Activity Context

CaseworkShooting

Category

Primary DepositRecovery

Specifications

DNA ProfilingSampling

Variables of Interest

case contextSampling Methodamplification method

Stringency of Control

Reality

Number of Individuals

698 casing collected from 125 cases

Replicates per Individual and Condition

1

Nucleic Acid

DNA

Bodily Origin

trace

Depositor & Contact

Depositor Characteristics

N/A

Criteria for Shedder Status

N/A

Previous Activities

case context

Contact Scenario

case context - sampling

Primary Substrate

Primary Substrate Type

cartridges

Primary Substrate Material

Metal

Deposit

handling, loading, shooting in case context

Delay

N/A

Secondary Substrate

Secondary Substrate Type

N/A

Secondary Substrate Material

N/A

Secondary Substrate Contact

N/A

Further Transfer

N/A

Sampling

Background DNA on Sampled Surface

Present

Sampling Time

delayed (n.s.)

Persistence

N/A

Sampling Method

swabbing in saline solution or soaking (cp. Dieltjes et al 2011) casings

Sampling Area

whole outer surface of casings

Laboratory Analysis

Extraction

proteolytic digestion, QIAamp DNA Mini kit, concentration to 10 µl

DNA Quantification

Quantifiler Human DNA Quantification kit

Input for Profiling

5µl used for profiling

Profiling

AmpFlSTR Identifiler or AmpFlSTR Identifiler Plus kit (Thermo Fisher), 3130 Genetic Analyzer, GeneMapper TM ID 3.2 software, threshold: 50 rfu

Reference Samples

dependent on case

Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis

profiles with alleles in >50% of loci (8) considered interpretable, all data shown for possible re-analysis

RNA Data Interpretation

N/A

Results

DNA Quantity

mostly <60 pg

Profile Quality

interpretable profiles (>50% of loci) in 15.6% of samples (related to 44.8% of cases)

Parameter Used for Comparison

interpretability of profiles (>50% of alleles)

Summary of Results

4% of profiles matching victims' profile; interpretable profiles: 1/2 single source, 1/2 mixtures; overall success rate of profiles generation: 15.6% per casing/44.8% per case; profiles mostly (84 %) inconclusive; DNA profile match with suspect or database search in 12/125 criminal cases; methods: Identifiler Plus > Identifiler kit, swabbing > soaking; Amplicon-length dependent decrease in amplification efficacy for soaked samples -> degradation or presence of inhibitors (possible dissolving during soaking process); degradation of amplicons >200bp generally observed phenomenon with Identifiler Plus kit performing better than older Identifiler kit

Raised Questions

how to define a successful PCR?; does soaking casings dissolve PCR inhibitors?

Cautionary Remarks

real case conditions: prone to uncontrollable effects