Impact of DNA degradation on massively parallel sequencing-based autosomal STR, iiSNP, and mitochondrial DNA typing systems
Biological samples, including skeletal remains exposed to environmental insults for extended periods of time, exhibit increasing levels of DNA damage and fragmentation. Human forensic identification methods typically use a combination of mitochondrial (mt) DNA sequencing and short tandem repeat (STR) analysis, which target segments of DNA ranging from 80 to 500 base pairs (bps). Larger templates are often unavailable as skeletal samples age and the associated DNA degrades. Single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) loci target shorter templates and may serve as a solution to the problem. Recently developed assays for STR and SNP analysis using a massively parallel sequencing approach, such as the ForenSeq kit (Verogen, San Diego, CA), offer a means for generating results from degraded samples as they target templates down to 60 to 170 bps. We performed a modeling study that demonstrates that SNPs can increase the significance of an identification when analyzing DNA down to an average size of 100 bps for input amounts between 0.375 and 1 ng of nuclear DNA. Observations from this study were then compared with human skeletal material results (n = 14, ninth to eighteenth centuries), which further demonstrated the utility of the ForenSeq kit for degraded samples. The robustness of the Promega PowerSeq™ Mito System was also tested with human skeletal remains (n = 70, ninth to eighteenth centuries), resulting in successful coverage of 99.29% of the mtDNA control region at 50× coverage or more. This was accompanied by modifications to a mainstream DNA extraction technique for skeletal remains that improved recovery of shorter templates.
KeywordsFragmented DNA Massively parallel sequencing SNPs STRs
The authors would like to thank the following people for their input and guidance throughout the project: Jennifer McElhoe and Charity Holland (Holland Research laboratory at the Pennsylvania State University), Molly Rathbun (The Pennsylvania State University), Sylvain Amory, Stefan Prost, Rene Huel (ICMP), and Ana Bilic (ICMP). All sheared samples were prepared with the help of the Penn State Genomics Core Facility – University Park, PA.
This project was partially funded thanks to the Carol DeForest Grant from the Northeastern Association of Forensic Science, Illumina, and the National Institute of Justice (2015-DN-BX-K025).
Compliance with ethical standards
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Skeletal material was provided with permission from the University of Split.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The Ethical committee from the Medical School (University of Split) approved the research on skeletal remains (approval no. 45-1106 from 6 March 2006).
- 2.Forensic Genetics Policy Initiative (2017) Establishing best practices for forensic DNA databases. http://dnapolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/BestPractice-Report-plus-cover-final.pdf. Accessed September 2017
- 3.International Committee of the Red Cross (2009) Missing People, DNA analysis and identification of human remains: a guide to best practice in armed conflicts and other situations of armed violence. https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/icrc_002_4010.pdf. Accessed September 2017
- 5.Parsons TJ, Huel RML, Bajunovic Z, Rizvic A (2019) Large scale DNA identification: the ICMP experience. Forensic Sci Int Genet. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.11.08
- 7.Parson W, Gusmao L, Hares DR, Irwin JA, Mayr WR, Morling N, Pokorak E, Prinz M, Salas A, Schneider PM, Parsons TJ (2014) DNA Commission of the International Society for Forensic Genetics: revised and extended guidelines for mitochondrial DNA typing. Forensic Sci Int Genet. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.07.010
- 9.Pilli E, Modi A, Serpico C, Achilli A, Lancioni H, Lippi B, Bertoldi F, Gelichi S, Lari M, Caramelli D (2013) Monitoring DNA contamination in handled vs directly excavated ancient human skeletal remains. PLoS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052524
- 11.Oh YN, Park J, Hong S (2017) Genetic analysis of old skeletal remains from Korean War victims using PowerPlex® Fusion 6C and MiniSTR system for human identification. Forensic Sci Int Gen Suppl Ser. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigss.2017.09.068
- 13.Eduardoff M, Xavier C, Strobl C, Casas-Vargas A, Parson W (2017) Optimized mtDNA control region primer extension capture analysis for forensically relevant samples and highly compromised mtDNA of different age and origin. Genes 8(10):237. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes8100237 CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 18.Yang DY, Waye JS, Dudar JC, Saunders SR (1998) Technical note: improved DNA extraction from ancient bone using silica-based spin columns. Am J Phys Anthropol 105(4):539–543. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-8644(199804)105 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Dabney J, Knapp M, Glocke I, Gansauge M-T, Weihmann A, Nickel B, Valdiosera C, Garcia N, Paabo S, Arsuaga J-L, Meyer M (2013) Complete mitochondrial genome sequence of a Middle Pleistocene cave bear reconstructed from ultrashort DNA fragments. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110(39):15758-15763Google Scholar
- 20.Gansauge M et al (2017) Single-stranded DNA library preparation from highly degraded DNA using T4 DNA ligase. Nucleic Acids Res 45(10). https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkx033
- 23.Carboni I, Fattorini P, Previderè C, Sorçaburu S, Cilieri, Iozzi S, Nutini AL, Contini E, Pescucci C, Torricelli F, Ricci U (2015) Evaluation of the reliability of the data generated by next generation sequencing from artificially degraded DNA samples. Forensic Sci Int Gen Suppl Ser. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigss.2015.09.034
- 29.Parson W et al (2015) Massively parallel sequencing of complete mitochondrial genomes from hair shaft samples. Forensic Sci Int – Gen. 15(8–15). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.11.009
- 38.Benschop CC, van der Beek CP, Meiland HC, van Gorp AG, Westen AA, Sljen T (2011) Low template STR typing: effect of replicate number and consensus method on genotyping reliability and DNA database search results. Forensic Sci Int – Gen. 5(4):316–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2010.06.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 39.Budowle B, Chakraborty R, Carmody G, Monson KL (2000) Source attribution of a forensic DNA profile. Forensic Sci Commun 2(3)Google Scholar
- 40.Moretti T, Moreno L, Smerick J, Pignone M, Hizon R, Buckleton J, Bright J, Onorato A (2016) Population data on the expanded CODIS core STR loci for eleven populations of significance for forensic DNA analyses in the United States. Forensic Sci Int – Gen. 25:175–18.1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.07.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.Csákyová V, Szécsényi-Nagy A, Bauerová M (2016) Maternal genetic composition of a medieval population from a Hungarian-Slavic contact zone in Central Europe. PLoS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151206
- 50.Holland MM, Wendt F Evaluation of the RapidHIT™ 200 (2015) an automated human identification system for STR analysis of single source samples. Forensic Sci Int Genet 14:76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.08.010