The Effect of Cleaning Agents on the Ability to Obtain DNA Profiles Using the Identifiler™ and PowerPlex® Y Multiplex Kits

Abstract:  A year after the introduction of Identifiler™ into the forensic DNA laboratories of the Institute of Environmental Science and Research Limited (ESR), increasing occurrences of dropout of the three loci, D7S820, D18S51, and FGA, were observed in samples where the DNA was not degraded and sufficient DNA was present that full DNA profiles were to be expected. The dropout was either partial or complete at these loci. Full profiles could sometimes be obtained by reamplification of samples using the same input amount of DNA. After a thorough investigation of the methods and procedures used in the laboratory, the cause of this inhibition was identified as the cleaning agent TriGene™ ADVANCE. This was determined after the deliberate addition of varying amounts of different cleaning reagents into the DNA amplification reactions. At concentrations of 0.004% TriGene™ ADVANCE caused inhibition resulting in tri‐loci dropout. At concentrations of 0.04% and higher, complete inhibition was observed. An effect was also seen on the amplification of samples using the Y STR profiling system PowerPlex®Y. This work highlights the importance of checking all reagents and chemicals prior to use, even those with no apparent direct influence on the DNA profiling process.

[1]  P. Collins,et al.  Developmental validation of a single-tube amplification of the 13 CODIS STR loci, D2S1338, D19S433, and amelogenin: the AmpFlSTR Identifiler PCR Amplification Kit. , 2004, Journal of forensic sciences.

[2]  Victor W. Weedn Review of: Forensic Pathology Reviews: Volume 1 , 2005 .

[3]  L. Hennessy,et al.  Developmental validation of the quantifiler real-time PCR kits for the quantification of human nuclear DNA samples. , 2005, Journal of forensic sciences.

[4]  Jo-Anne Bright,et al.  Comparison of the variables affecting the recovery of DNA from common drinking containers. , 2002, Forensic science international.

[5]  Timothy Power,et al.  FaSTR DNA: a new expert system for forensic DNA analysis. , 2008, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[6]  Karen Sykes,et al.  Application of the BioMek 2000 Laboratory Automation Workstation and the DNA IQ System to the extraction of forensic casework samples. , 2004, Journal of forensic sciences.

[7]  Bruce Budowle,et al.  Validation of male-specific, 12-locus fluorescent short tandem repeat (STR) multiplex. , 2005, Forensic science international.

[8]  R. V. van Oorschot,et al.  Quantifiler™ Observations of Relevance to Forensic Casework * , 2008, Journal of forensic sciences.

[9]  M. Kanaoka,et al.  Comparison of gene expression changes induced by biguanides in db/db mice liver. , 2008, The Journal of toxicological sciences.

[10]  SallyAnn Harbison,et al.  An analysis of the success rate of 908 trace DNA samples submitted to the Crime Sample Database Unit in New Zealand , 2008 .

[11]  R Higuchi,et al.  Chelex 100 as a medium for simple extraction of DNA for PCR-based typing from forensic material. , 2013, BioTechniques.

[12]  T. Parsons,et al.  High efficiency DNA extraction from bone by total demineralization. , 2007, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[13]  Workstation and the DNA IQ TM System to the Extraction of Forensic Casework Samples ∗ , 2003 .

[14]  Jo-Anne Bright,et al.  Recovery of trace DNA and its application to DNA profiling of shoe insoles. , 2004, Forensic science international.