Comparative study of Rapid DNA versus conventional methods on compromised bones

Abstract

Equivalent amounts of compromised bones were used to directly compare STR success of conventional and Rapid DNA methods. Conventional DNA extraction methods, including manual full demineralization and semi-automated PrepFiler BTA/ AutoMate Express (ThermoFisher Scientific), provided insights regarding the DNA quantity and extent of degradation of each compromised bone analyzed with ANDE 6C (ANDE Corp) and RapidHIT ID (ThermoFisher Scientific) Rapid systems. Full demineralization provided higher DNA yields than extraction with the AutoMate Express for quality control (QC) and environmentally challenged bones. The degradation indices ranged from ∼1.8 to 73. Both demineralization and AutoMate Express extracts benefited from additional clean-up with NucleoSpin XS devices, which usually resulted in more alleles being detected than without further clean-up. Complete "CODIS 20″ profiles could be obtained with bone QC1 with all methods. However, among the 14 compromised bones with low DNA content, complete CODIS 20 profiles were detected for 7, 4, and 0 bones analyzed with demineralization, AutoMate Express and ANDE methods, respectively. The RapidHIT ID was the least sensitive method, providing the fewest detectable alleles for the bones tested. Whereas extracted DNA of approximately 0.1 ng can yield complete GlobalFiler STR profiles, at least 30 ng was required for complete FlexPlex 27 profiles using the ANDE 6C Rapid DNA system. In addition to being less sensitive than conventional methods, the tested Rapid DNA approaches were less predictable when attempting to improve STR success and proved to be less reliable in genotyping accuracy.

Keywords: Compromised bones; Extraction efficiency; Rapid DNA; STR typing success.