Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30341454›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2019

Assessment of impact of DNA extraction methods on analysis of human remain samples on massively parallel sequencing success.

Xiangpei Zeng, Kyleen Elwick, Carrie Mayes, Maiko Takahashi, Jonathan L King, David Gangitano, Bruce Budowle, Sheree Hughes-Stamm

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xiangpei ZengCenter for Human Identification, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd., Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Kyleen ElwickDepartment of Forensic Science, Sam Houston State University, 1003 Bowers Blvd., Huntsville, TX, 77340, USA. kee019@shsu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7174-710X
Carrie MayesDepartment of Forensic Science, Sam Houston State University, 1003 Bowers Blvd., Huntsville, TX, 77340, USA.
Maiko TakahashiCenter for Human Identification, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd., Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Jonathan L KingCenter for Human Identification, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd., Fort Worth, TX, USA.
David GangitanoDepartment of Forensic Science, Sam Houston State University, 1003 Bowers Blvd., Huntsville, TX, 77340, USA.
Bruce BudowleCenter for Human Identification, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd., Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Sheree Hughes-StammDepartment of Forensic Science, Sam Houston State University, 1003 Bowers Blvd., Huntsville, TX, 77340, USA.
Sam Houston State University · USUniversity of North Texas · US

Funding

National Institute of Justice 2015-DN-BX-K066
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Skeletal remains recovered from missing persons' cases are often exposed to harsh environmental conditions resulting in the DNA being damaged, degraded, and/or the samples containing PCR inhibitors. In this study, the efficacy of common extraction methods was evaluated to remove high levels of PCR inhibitors commonly encountered with human remains, and their downstream compatibility with the two leading sequencing chemistries and platforms for human identification purposes. Blood, hair, and bone samples were spiked with high levels of inhibitors commonly identified in each particular substrate in order to test the efficiency of various DNA extraction methods prior to sequencing. Samples were extracted using three commercial extraction kits (DNA IQ™, DNA Investigator, and PrepFiler® BTA), organic (blood and hair only), and two total demineralization protocols (bone only)). Massively parallel sequencing (MPS) was performed using two different systems: Precision ID chemistry and a custom AmpliSeq™ STR and iiSNP panel on the Ion S5™ System and the ForenSeq DNA Signature Prep Kit on the MiSeq FGx™. The overall results showed that all DNA extraction methods were efficient and are fully compatible with both MPS systems. Key performance indicators such as STR and SNP reportable alleles, read depth, and heterozygote balance were comparable for each extraction method. In samples where CE-based STRs yielded partial profiles (bone), MPS-based STRs generated more complete or full profiles. Moreover, MPS panels contain more STR loci than current CE-based STR kits and also include SNPs, which can further increase the power of discrimination obtained from these samples, making MPS a desirable choice for the forensic analysis of such challenging samples.

Indexed as

DNA FingerprintingHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMicrosatellite RepeatsSequence Analysis, DNABlood Chemical AnalysisBody RemainsBone and BonesDNAElectrophoresis, CapillaryGenotypeHairHumansPolymorphism, Single NucleotideDNADNA extractionIon S5™Massively parallel sequencingMiSeq FGx™Missing personsPCR inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID30341454
OpenAlexW2896542281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.