A comparison of four methods for PCR inhibitor removal

被引:50
|
作者
Hu, Qingqing [1 ]
Liu, Yuxuan [1 ]
Yi, Shaohua [1 ]
Huang, Daixin [1 ]
机构
[1] Huazhong Univ Sci & Technol, Tongji Med Coll, Dept Forens Med, Wuhan 430030, Peoples R China
关键词
Forensic DNA analysis; PCR inhibition; PowerClean (R) DNA Clean-Up; DNA IQ (TM); Phenol-Chloroform; Chelex (R)-100; POLYMERASE-CHAIN-REACTION; DNA EXTRACTION; SPIN COLUMNS; AMPLIFICATION; SAMPLES; RECOVERY; KIT;
D O I
10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.12.001
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 ; 090102 ;
摘要
Biological samples collected from the crime scenes often contain some compounds that can inhibit the polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The removal of PCR inhibitors from the extracts prior to the PCR amplification is vital for successful forensic DNA typing. This paper aimed to evaluate the ability of four different methods (PowerClean (R) DNA Clean-Up kit, DNA IQ (TM) System, Phenol-Chloroformextraction and Chelex (R)-100 methods) to remove eight commonly encountered PCR inhibitors including: melanin, humic acid, collagen, bile salt, hematin, calciumions, indigo and urea. Each of these PCR inhibitors was effectively removed by the PowerClean (R) DNA Clean-Up kit and DNA IQ (TM) System as demonstrated by generating more complete short tandemrepeat (STR) profiles from the cleaned up inhibitor samples than from the raw inhibitor samples. The Phenol-Chloroform extraction and Chelex (R)-100 methods, however, could only remove some of eight PCR inhibitors. Our results demonstrated that the PowerClean (R) DNA Clean-Up kit and DNAIQ (TM) System were very effective for the removal of known PCR inhibitors that are routinely found in DNA extracts from forensic samples. (c) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:94 / 97
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Assessing Text Processing: A Comparison of Four Methods
    Scott, D. Beth
    JOURNAL OF LITERACY RESEARCH, 2008, 40 (03) : 290 - 316
  • [32] A COMPARISON OF FOUR METHODS FOR ASSESSING PERCENT FAT
    Borowski, K. M.
    Thomas, D. Q.
    McCaw, S. T.
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2001, 33 (05): : S241 - S241
  • [33] Comparison of four methods of inducing pseudopregnancy in rabbits
    Syafruddin, Syafruddin
    Wahyuni, Sri
    Gholib, Gholib
    Siregar, Tongku Nizwan
    MEDYCYNA WETERYNARYJNA-VETERINARY MEDICINE-SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2022, 78 (02): : 85 - 90
  • [34] Comparison of four different phenylalanine determination methods
    Fingerhut, R
    Stehn, M
    Kohlschutter, A
    CLINICA CHIMICA ACTA, 1997, 264 (01) : 65 - 73
  • [35] A comparison of four methods for simulating the diffusion process
    Tuerlinckx, F
    Maris, E
    Ratcliff, R
    De Boeck, P
    BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS INSTRUMENTS & COMPUTERS, 2001, 33 (04): : 443 - 456
  • [36] Comparison of four methods for sperm preparation for IUI
    Ren, SS
    Sun, GH
    Ku, CH
    Chen, DC
    Wu, GJ
    ARCHIVES OF ANDROLOGY, 2004, 50 (03): : 139 - 143
  • [37] Comparison of four methods of presentation of breast specimens
    PA Thompson
    Breast Cancer Research, 2 (Suppl 2)
  • [38] Comparison of four methods for identifying Streptococcus pneumoniae
    Chandler, LJ
    Reisner, BS
    Woods, GL
    Jafri, AK
    DIAGNOSTIC MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASE, 2000, 37 (04) : 285 - 287
  • [39] Comparison of four methods for transionospheric scintillation evaluation
    Strangeways, Hal J.
    Zernov, Nikolay N.
    Gherm, Vadim E.
    RADIO SCIENCE, 2014, 49 (10) : 899 - 909
  • [40] A comparison of four methods of bioassay for the gonadotropic factors
    Frank, RT
    Berman, RL
    ENDOCRINOLOGY, 1939, 25 (05) : 683 - 688