Recovery of DNA from fired and unfired cartridge casings: comparison of two DNA collection methods.

Autor: Elwick K; Visiting Scientist Program, Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory Division, Research and Support Unit, 2501 Investigation Parkway, Quantico, VA 22135, USA., Gauthier Q; Visiting Scientist Program, Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory Division, Research and Support Unit, 2501 Investigation Parkway, Quantico, VA 22135, USA., Rink S; Visiting Scientist Program, Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory Division, Research and Support Unit, 2501 Investigation Parkway, Quantico, VA 22135, USA., Cropper E; Visiting Scientist Program, Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory Division, Research and Support Unit, 2501 Investigation Parkway, Quantico, VA 22135, USA., Kavlick MF; Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory Division, Research and Support Unit, 2501 Investigation Parkway, Quantico, VA 22135, USA. Electronic address: mfkavlick@fbi.gov.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Forensic science international. Genetics [Forensic Sci Int Genet] 2022 Jul; Vol. 59, pp. 102726. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 May 20.
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2022.102726
Abstrakt: For over 10 years, various studies have attempted to increase the recovery of DNA from ammunition by modifying the DNA collection, extraction, purification, and amplification procedures, with varying levels of success. This study focused on the "soaking" method of Montpetit & O'Donnell [1] and the "rinse-and-swab" method of Bille et al. [2]. First, testing for the presence of exogenous DNA, 210 boxed cartridges (brass, steel, and nickel-plated) from nine manufacturers were swabbed and DNA was extracted, concentrated, and quantified. Extracts that quantified > 0 ng/µL (44 of 210) were amplified and genotyped with GlobalFiler™. Of those, only one extract yielded two alleles indicating that the manufacturing and packaging of ammunition was virtually DNA free. Next, to obtain a baseline comparison of two DNA collection methods on a non-metallic substrate and identify a suitable number of cells to spot on cartridges, different DNA input amounts of primary human adult epidermal keratinocytes (HEKa) were tested. Thereafter, 300 brass and 300 nickel-plated, cartridges were spotted with HEKa cells containing ~5 ng of DNA, fired or unfired, and processed with either method. Finally, five methods representing hybrids of the soaking and rinse-and-swab methods were tested to determine if variations of those methods could be used to increase DNA yield and recovery. The results show that the soaking method consistently yielded more DNA than the rinse-and-swab method from a non-metallic substrate. However, the comparison study demonstrated that both methods performed comparably for cartridges. On average, the soaking method recovered 0.25 ng of DNA (5.1% recovery) and the rinse-and-swab method recovered 0.28 ng (5.8% recovery). However, average recoveries were significantly different among three analysts and considerable variation in yields were observed, possibly due to storage time. Furthermore, consistent with prior reports, the DNA recovered from brass casings was only 16% of that recovered from nickel-plated casings and the average yield of DNA from fired casings was reduced to 67% of unfired casings. Moreover, DNA extracts from brass or nickel-plated casings did not appear to contain amplification inhibitors and only 30/596 appeared severely degraded. Finally, both the published rinse-and-swab and soaking methods yielded more DNA than all modifications of the two methods. Overall, both methods yielded equivalent DNA quantities. Additionally, recovery of DNA from any given cartridge casing may be dependent on storage time as well as the skill, proficiency, and experience of the analyst and may reflect stochastic effects, particularly for casings containing low copy and/or degraded DNA.
(Published by Elsevier B.V.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: