Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of different methods of DNA recovery and PCR amplification in STR profiling of casings—a retrospective study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Legal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Casings represent common evidence in a forensic laboratory, due to high frequency of firearms usage during perpetration of criminal offenses. Possible DNA evidence from casings is compromised by degradation, inhibition, and initial low-quantity deposition of biological material. For that reason, in the last 15 years, scientists have been trying to optimize procedures for recovery and amplification of DNA possibly present on its surface. In this study, we share our 12-year experience done on a total of 698 casework casings, comparing two DNA recovery methods commonly used—soaking and swabbing, as well as efficacy of two commercially available DNA amplification kits (AmpFLSTR® Identifiler® and AmpFLSTR® Identifiler® Plus kits). Of all analyzed casings, 30 were excluded as 28 (4%) matched the victims’ DNA profiles and 2 (0.3%) samples were proved to be contaminated by technicians. Overall success in obtaining interpretable DNA profiles was 15.6% (104/668) (13.8% (55/399) for AmpFLSTR® Identifiler® Plus combined with soaking, 22% (33/150) for AmpFLSTR® Identifiler® Plus combined with swabbing, and 13.4% (16/119) using AmpFLSTR® Identifiler® kit and swabbing recovery method). Our data suggest the importance of both DNA recovery methods and amplification kits used, and point out swabbing of casings combined with AmpFLSTR® Identifiler® Plus kit as methods of choice. Nonetheless, our results are based on real casework and are prone to uncontrolled variables.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Horsman-Hall K, KM OY, Karczynski SL, Davis AL, Ban JD, Greenspoon SA (2009) Development of STR profiles from firearms and fired cartridge cases. Forensic Sci Int 3:242–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2009.02.007

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Gashi B, Edwards MR, Sermon PA, Courney L, Harrison D, Xu Y (2010) Measurement of 9 mm cartridge case external temperatures and its forensic application. Forensic Sci Int 200(1–3):21–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.03.018

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Montpetit S, O’Donnell P (2009) An optimized procedure for obtaining DNA from fired and unfired ammunition. Forensic Sci Int 4:70–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.03.012

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wang DY, Chang CW, Lagacé RE, Calandro LM, Hennessy LK (2012) Developmental validation of the AmpFℓSTR® Identifiler® Plus PCR Amplification Kit: an established multiplex assay with improved performance. J Forensic Sci 57(2):453–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01963.x

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Romanini C, RomeroFerrer M, Catelli ML, Vullo C (2011) A comparison of AmpFlSTR Identifiler™ Kit versus AmpFlSTR Identifiler Plus™ Kit in challenging bone samples by using normal and increased PCR cycle number. Forensic Sci Int Genet: ss 3(1):e514–e515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigss.2011.10.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. S. Đurđević-Lukić, Tadić M, Milić T (2015) Weapons targeted: the misuse of firearms in Serbia / - Beograd:SEESAC. Article in Serbian. (http://www.seesac.org/f/docs/SALW-Awareness-and-Communication/Oruzje-na-metiTargeting-Weapons-BCMS.pdf)

  7. Dieltjes P, Mieremet R, Zuniga S, Kraaijenbrink T, Pijpe J, de Knijff P (2011) A sensitive method to extract DNA from biological traces present on ammunition for the purpose of genetic profiling. Int J Legal Med 125:597–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-010-0454-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Forensic and Applied Molecular Genetics, Faculty of Biology, University of Belgrade, Studentski trg, Belgrade, 11000, Serbia

    Verica Radojicic, Milica Keckarevic Markovic, Feđa Puac, Miljana Kecmanovic & Dusan Keckarevic

Authors
  1. Verica Radojicic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Milica Keckarevic Markovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Feđa Puac
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Miljana Kecmanovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Dusan Keckarevic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Milica Keckarevic Markovic.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Serbian national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments. The study was approved by authorities of the Faculty of Biology at the University of Belgrade.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Radojicic, V., Keckarevic Markovic, M., Puac, F. et al. Comparison of different methods of DNA recovery and PCR amplification in STR profiling of casings—a retrospective study. Int J Legal Med 132, 1575–1580 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-018-1812-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-018-1812-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation