4.3 Article

Assessing three soil removal methods for environmental DNA analysis of mock forensic geology evidence

期刊

JOURNAL OF FORENSIC SCIENCES
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.15399

关键词

DNA metabarcoding; environmental DNA; forensic geology; next generation sequencing; soil; soil removal

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soil is a valuable resource in criminal investigations due to its variability and ability to be easily transferred. This study assessed three different soil removal methods and their impact on the analysis of environmental DNA (eDNA). The results showed that picking/scraping was the most effective method in terms of DNA concentration, and the removal method had no impact on the recovery of target DNA variants. These findings suggest that picking/scraping is a suitable soil removal method for eDNA analysis.
Soil is useful in criminal investigations as it is highly variable and readily transferred. Forensic geologists use several different techniques to removal soil from evidence prior to the analysis of inorganic components. There has been recent interest from the forensic science community to analyze environmental deoxyribonucleic acid (eDNA) associated with soil to augment existing forensic analyses. Notably however, limited research has been conducted to compare commonly used soil removal methods for downstream eDNA analysis. In this study, three soil removal methods were assessed: picking/scraping, sonication, and swabbing. Three mock evidence types (t-shirts, boot soles, and trowels) were sampled in triplicate with each removal method (n = 27). Soil samples underwent DNA isolation, quantification, and amplification of four genomic barcode regions: 16S for bacteria, ITS1 for fungi, ITS2 for plants, and COI for arthropods. Amplicons were prepared into libraries for DNA sequencing on an Illumina (R) MiniSeq. DNA concentrations were highest in picked/scraped samples and were statistically significant compared with swabbed and sonicated samples. Amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) were identified, and removal methods had no impact on the recovery of the total number of target ASVs. Additionally, when assessing each sample in multidimensional space, picked/scraped samples tended to cluster separately from swabbed and sonicated samples. The soil core used a reference in this study also clustered with the picked/scraped samples, indicating that these samples may be more reflective of the communities collected from soil cores. Based on these data, we identified that picking/scraping is an acceptable soil removal method for eDNA analysis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据