Color Me Impressed

How 8-Dye CE Outshines 6-Dye for Degraded Forensic Samples

Emily Quartemont a*, Heather Sarik a, Kristen Naughton a a Bode Technology, 10430 Furnace Road, Suite 107, Lorton VA, 22079 * Corresponding author: Emily Quartemont, emily.quartemont@bodetech.com

Share this article

INTRODUCTION

Often in forensic casework, DNA evidence can be degraded and contain very low quantities of DNA, affecting how well samples are amplified with current short tandem repeat (STR) megaplex assays. This can complicate DNA analysis and interpretation by introducing several challenges, including reduced DNA recovery, preferential amplification that can lead to allelic and locus dropout, and increased peak imbalance and amplification artifacts.

Recent advances in DNA extraction techniques have improved recovery of smaller DNA fragments from highly degraded or low template samples [1–3], but amplification of these fragments with the current STR megaplexes can still be limited. As a result, alternative analysis approaches, such as mini-STRs or non-STR technology (e.g., Insertion/Deletion markers, mitochondrial DNA, SNPs) have been explored [4-7]. However, these methods often consume more DNA, provide lower discriminatory power, and lack sufficient databases for comparisons with non-STR data. Promega’s Spectrum CE system with its expanded 8-dye chemistry provides the opportunity to address common limitations of typing degraded DNA by enabling the inclusion of more mini-STRs without compromising the discriminatory power of STR megaplex assays.

The PowerPlex® 35GY System (PP35GY) targets 35 loci in a single assay, 23 autosomal STRs and 11 Y-STRs. PP35GY targets the same set of autosomal loci included in the PowerPlex® Fusion 6C System (PPF6C), but with the addition of two more dye channels, the autosomal targets are redesigned to be smaller overall with the complete amplicon size distribution of 15 autosomal STRs under 250 bp (Figure 1) [8]. The PP35GY system is also updated to include quality indicators that are not as commonly present in the current standard amplification kits that can assist with data interpretation by helping to distinguish between degradation and inhibition.

Figure 1: PowerPlex® 35GY loci layout [9].

METHODS

In this study, PP35GY was evaluated and compared with PPF6C as a current 6-dye industry standard to determine if more genetic information could be obtained from degraded forensic samples and how the resulting match statistics would be affected. A sensitivity study was performed in addition to a degradation study using both artificially degraded and mock casework samples including bones, handled fired cartridge casings, and rootless hair shafts. The Quantifiler™ Trio degradation index (DI) was evaluated as an estimation of sample quality prior to amplification, where a DI less than one was not considered degraded and a DI greater than ten was considered severely degraded. All PP35GY samples were amplified in 25 µl reaction volumes at 29 cycles, injected with the default Spectrum CE 8C parameters, and analyzed in FaSTR™ DNA with the analytical thresholds defined in the PP35GY developmental validation [8]. With the exception of the sensitivity study, the optimal 1 ng template amount was targeted for PP35GY amplification when possible. All PPF6C analysis was completed according to internally validated methods and thresholds. Profile completeness based on the number of complete CODIS core STR loci and likelihood ratio strengths were compared. All statistical analyses were performed with the Caucasian allele frequencies reported in the NIST U.S. population data for 29 autosomal STR loci [10].

SENSITIVITY

Seven-point dilution titrations of two reference samples, one female and one male, were used to evaluate the sensitivity of both kits. When template was less than 0.25 ng, the expanded 8-dye chemistry showed improvement in sensitivity as compared to PPF6C, indicated by higher profile completeness at lower input template amounts (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Profile completeness comparisons of 7-point dilution titrations in both PP35GY and PPF6C with the log10 (likelihood ratio) overlaid.

DEGRADED SAMPLES

Twelve control DNA samples, from one reference male donor, were used to create artificially degraded DNA. Six were exposed to UV light with the SpectroLinker XL-1500 crosslinker at increasing amounts of time: 30, 60, 120, 240, 480, and 960 seconds; equivalent to 0.3, 0.7, 1.3, 2.6, 5.2, and 10.4 J/cm2, respectively. The remaining six samples were mechanically sheared with the Covaris M220 Focused-ultrasonicator in MicroTUBE-15 AFA Beads Screw Cap tubes at increasing treatment times of 42, 61, 80, 165, 250, and 335 seconds. All samples were amplified with the optimal 1.0 ng template DNA, except for the 960 second UV sample amplified with a maximum input of 0.78 ng. The DI increased with increasing treatment times for all samples while profile completeness decreased as expected. PP35GY outperformed PPF6C at the greatest degradation time points (Figure 3). These results demonstrate that the decreased PP35GY amplicon sizes allow for the generation of more complete profiles from degraded DNA.

Figure 3: Profile completeness of all artificially degraded samples in both PP35GY and PPF6C with the log10 (likelihood ratio) overlaid and DI listed below.

Following the promising data from the artificially degraded samples, bones, handled fired cartridge casings, and rootless hair shafts were evaluated as typically challenging mock casework type samples (Figure 4).

1. Bones Four bones, two femurs and two occipital bones, were extracted from approximately 250 mg of bone powder with the proprietary Bode Bone Prep DNA extraction method. The two femur bones (Bones 1 and 2) generated the best profile results, while the two occipital bones (Bones 3 and 4) generated more varied profile results. PP35GY continued to outperform PPF6C when suboptimal template input (ng) and quality (DI) was amplified.

2. Fired Cartridge Casings Five handled fired cartridge casings (FCCs) were extracted with Bode X-traction for degraded DNA recovery. While the FCCs showed more variable results, the profile results of FCC3 and FCC4 both provide examples of the benefits of using the expanded dye-chemistry to gain more genetic information, and thus higher likelihood ratios, with input material of poorer quality.

3. Rootless Hair Shafts Two hair shaft samples were extracted with Bode X-traction for degraded DNA recovery with both samples able to be amplified with optimal template amount. For the sample with a low DI, both chemistries generated complete profiles with similar likelihood ratio strengths. However, as the DI increased, both profiles decreased in completeness and in likelihood ratio strength but with PP35GY outperforming PPF6C.

Figure 4: Profile completeness of all mock casework samples in both PP35GY and PPF6C with the log10 (likelihood ratio) overlaid. Sample DI and template input amounts are listed below each sample name.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study support that with the smaller amplicon designs and increased multiplexing capacity, more genetic information and subsequently stronger match statistics can be obtained from input material of lower qualities and quantities. While the Y-STR markers were not discussed specifically in this article, PowerPlex® 35GY also enables scientists to obtain more genetic information while using less resources with the simultaneous amplification of 23 autosomal STRs and 11 Y-STRs in a single reaction. Overall, the expanded 8-dye chemistry presents notable improvements over current megaplex chemistries to better address the common limitations of typing degraded DNA.

REFERENCES

  1. T.W. Bille, G. Fahrig, S.M. Weitz, G.A. Peiffer, An improved process for the collection and DNA analysis of fired cartridge cases, Forensic Science International: Genetics 46 (2020) 102238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102238.
  2. M.D. Brandhagen, O. Loreille, J.A. Irwin, Fragmented Nuclear DNA Is the Predominant Genetic Material in Human Hair Shafts, Genes (Basel) 9 (2018) 640. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes9120640.
  3. N. Rohland, I. Glocke, A. Aximu-Petri, M. Meyer, Extraction of highly degraded DNA from ancient bones, teeth and sediments for high-throughput sequencing, Nat Protoc 13 (2018) 2447–2461. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-018-0050-5.
  4. J.J. Mulero, C.W. Chang, R.E. Lagacé, D.Y. Wang, J.L. Bas, T.P. McMahon, L.K. Hennessy, Development and Validation of the AmpFℓSTR® MiniFilerTM PCR Amplification Kit: A MiniSTR Multiplex for the Analysis of Degraded and/or PCR Inhibited DNA, Journal of Forensic Sciences 53 (2008) 838–852. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2008.00760.x.
  5. H. Brown, R. Thompson, G. Murphy, D. Peters, B. La Rue, J. King, A.H. Montgomery, M. Carroll, J. Baus, S. Sinha, F.R. Wendt, B. Song, R. Chakraborty, B. Budowle, S.K. Sinha, Development and validation of a novel multiplexed DNA analysis system, InnoTyper® 21, Forensic Sci Int Genet 29 (2017) 80–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.03.017.
  6. J.M. Butler, B.C. Levin, Forensic applications of mitochondrial DNA, Trends in Biotechnology 16 (1998) 158–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7799(98)01173-1.
  7. B. Bruijns, R. Tiggelaar, H. Gardeniers, Massively parallel sequencing techniques for forensics: A review, ELECTROPHORESIS 39 (2018) 2642–2654. https://doi.org/10.1002/elps.201800082.
  8. W. Qu, J. Liu, L. Guo, F. Wang, Z. Gong, Y. Liu, Y. Liu, H. Jia, H. Rong, M. Li, P. Wei, D. Wen, C. Wang, R. Xu, X. Tang, S. Chen, X. Fu, X. Li, Y. Wang, Y. Wang, T. Zhang, Y. Wang, L. Chen, J. Li, Y. Liu, J. Cai, B. Jiang, L. Zha, Validation of the PowerPlex® 35GY System: a novel eight-dye STR multiplex kit on the Spectrum Compact CE System, Int J Legal Med 138 (2024) 2299–2314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-024-03308-x.
  9. PowerPlex® 35GY System, (2026). https://www.promega.com/products/forensic-dna-analysis-ce/str-amplification/powerplex-35gy-system/?tabset0=0
  10. C.R. Hill, D.L. Duewer, M.C. Kline, M.D. Coble, J.M. Butler, U.S. population data for 29 autosomal STR loci, Forensic Sci Int Genet 7 (2013) e82-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2012.12.004.

Header: Generated with AI