Publication:
A method for extracting DNA from hard tissues for use in forensic identification

dc.contributor.authorJarunya Samsuwanen_US
dc.contributor.authorThanutham Somboonchokepisalen_US
dc.contributor.authorThunyathorn Akaraputtipornen_US
dc.contributor.authorTunwarut Srimuangen_US
dc.contributor.authorPhuris Phuengsukdaengen_US
dc.contributor.authorAunchulee Suwannaraten_US
dc.contributor.authorApiwat Mutiranguraen_US
dc.contributor.authorNakarin Kitkumthornen_US
dc.contributor.otherChulalongkorn Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherPolice General Hospitalen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-23T10:26:33Z
dc.date.available2019-08-23T10:26:33Z
dc.date.issued2018-11-01en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2018, Spandidos Publications. All rights reserved. With deceased and decayed bodies, personal identification is performed using hard tissue DNA, commonly extracted from bone. The quantity and quality of DNA used in the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification step is critical for a successful outcome. Since enamel is the strongest tissue in the human body, it was hypothesized that teeth may preserve DNA better than bones. In the present study, porcine teeth and bone samples were exposed to a variety of environments that imitated personal identification conditions, and DNA extracted from the teeth and bone samples was compared, using a PCR amplification method. The porcine teeth and bones were exposed to 11 different conditions for 5 different time periods to imitate a series of common crime scenes. DNA was extracted by a standard phenol-chloroform method. To test DNA quality, PCR was performed with primers designed to amplify porcine β-actin (ACTB) and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences. The results demonstrated that the quality of DNA extracted from teeth was greater than that extracted from bone in the following environments: Buried in sand, soaked in caustic soda and burnt with rubber. By contrast, the quality of DNA extracted from bone was greater than that extracted from teeth when samples were buried in soil or submerged in water. There was no discernable difference in the quality of DNA extracted from bones and teeth in several environments, including being submerged in seawater, soaked in sulfuric acid, left in open air, and stored at 4,-20 and-80˚C. Additionally, the results suggested that PCR using mtDNA primers performed better than that using ACTB primers. Finally, it was indicated that components of seawater may inhibit PCR amplification. The preliminary data reported here may provide basic guidelines for selecting the optimum source of DNA in each case.en_US
dc.identifier.citationBiomedical Reports. Vol.9, No.5 (2018), 433-438en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3892/br.2018.1148en_US
dc.identifier.issn20499442en_US
dc.identifier.issn20499434en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85053778287en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/45012
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85053778287&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biologyen_US
dc.subjectNeuroscienceen_US
dc.subjectPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceuticsen_US
dc.titleA method for extracting DNA from hard tissues for use in forensic identificationen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85053778287&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections