4.3 Article

Inferring chronological age from DNA methylation patterns of human teeth

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 159, Issue 4, Pages 585-595

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.22921

Keywords

DNA methylation; age-estimation; teeth; ELOVL2

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectiveCurrent methods to determine chronological age from modern and ancient remains rely on both morphological and molecular approaches. However, low accuracy and the lack of standardized protocols make the development of alternative methods for the estimation of individual's age even more urgent for several research fields, such as biological anthropology, biodemography, forensics, evolutionary genetics, and ancient DNA studies. Therefore, the aim of this study is to identify genomic regions whose DNA methylation level correlates with age in modern teeth. MethodsWe used MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry to analyze DNA methylation levels of specific CpGs located in the ELOVL2, FHL2, and PENK genes. We considered methylation data from cementum, dentin and pulp of 21 modern teeth (from 17 to 77 years old) to construct a mathematical model able to exploit DNA methylation values to predict age of the individuals. ResultsThe median difference between the real age and that estimated using DNA methylation values is 1.20 years (SD=1.9) if DNA is recovered from both cementum and pulp of the same modern teeth, 2.25 years (SD=2.5) if DNA is recovered from dental pulp, 2.45 years (SD=3.3) if DNA is extracted from cementum and 7.07 years (SD=7.0) when DNA is recovered from dentin only. DiscussionWe propose for the first time the evaluation of DNA methylation at ELOVL2, FHL2, and PENK genes as a powerful tool to predict age in modern teeth for anthropological applications. Future studies are needed to apply this method also to historical and relatively ancient human teeth. Am J Phys Anthropol 159:585-595, 2016. (c) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available