Current forensic ancestry-informative panels are limited in their ability to differentiate populations in the Asia-Pacific region. MAPlex (Multiplex for the Asia-Pacific), a massively parallel sequencing (MPS) assay, was developed to improve differentiation of East Asian, South Asian and Near Oceanian populations found in the extensive cross-continental Asian region that shows complex patterns of admixture at its margins. This study reports the development of MAPlex; the selection of SNPs in combination with microhaplotype markers; assay design considerations for reducing the lengths of microhaplotypes while preserving their ancestry-informativeness; adoption of new population-informative multiple-allele SNPs; compilation of South Asian-informative SNPs suitable for forensic AIMs panels; and the compilation of extensive reference and test population genotypes from online whole-genome-sequence data for MAPlex markers. STRUCTURE genetic clustering software was used to gauge the ability of MAPlex to differentiate a broad set of populations from South and East Asia, the West Pacific regions of Near Oceania, as well as the other globally distributed population groups. Preliminary assessment of MAPlex indicates enhanced South Asian differentiation with increased divergence between West Eurasian, South Asian and East Asian populations, compared to previous forensic SNP panels of comparable scale. In addition, MAPlex shows efficient differentiation of Middle Eastern individuals from Europeans. MAPlex is the first forensic AIM assay to combine binary and multiple-allele SNPs with microhaplotypes, adding the potential to detect and analyze mixed source forensic DNA.

No abstract

DNA extracted from fingernail clipping of victims in forensic cases is a possible source of DNA from the perpetrator in cases where victims struggled or defended themselves. The source of this DNA on a victim's fingernails could possibly originate from contact with the suspect's blood, saliva, semen or scratched skin. In this technical note we evaluate the relevance of routine DNA typing of fingernail clippings in the forensic biology laboratory when, in real casework, normally only small quantities of nail material is sent. This was carried out by extracting DNA from fingernail clippings from a number of volunteers, before and after aggressively scratching other volunteers. No blood was drawn from the scratching, but skin flakes were observed under the nails before cutting and subsequent DNA typing. The DNA extracted was then typed using the STR systems: HUMTHO1, HUMTPOX and HUMCSF1PO (CTT triplex) and the system of D1S80. These profiles were compared with profiles achieved by similar typing of buccal swabs as a reference from each volunteer. In this study, the profile detected from each volunteer's clippings was the same before and after scratching, and matched the profile of the corresponding volunteer as defined by typing each volunteer's reference buccal swab. Fingernail clippings that are sent to our lab in actual casework are usually so small that additional treatment by swabbing or removing debris from below the clipping is not possible. For this reason, in this simulation the entire clippings were used for DNA extraction, to maximize the possibility of finding an additional profile. In conclusion, the findings from this study show that although the profiles obtained when typing fingernail clippings are those of the donors themselves, we suggest that typing of fingernail clippings should be carried out in forensic cases only when relevant. We would suggest that fingernail clippings not be routinely sent to the biology laboratory as items of evidence to be tested.

The compound 1,2-indanedione was recently introduced in our laboratory as an operational reagent for developing latent fingerprints on porous surfaces. As part of the reagent implementation, a study was carried out in order to determine whether either of the two operational 1,2-indanediones formulations interferes with further DNA profiling. Both formulations are based on HFE7100 solvent. One is acidic and the other neutral. In a controlled experiment, known donors attached stamps to envelopes by licking them. The stamped envelopes were initially treated with either one indanedione formulation or the other, and DNA was then extracted for STR typing. No differences were observed between the STR profiles obtained from treated and untreated stamps and envelopes, indicating that 1,2-indanedione does not adversely affect the extraction and subsequent amplification of the STRs examined. However, preliminary results indicate that potential DNA analysis depends on the time interval between the indanedione treatment and DNA extraction as no DNA can be recovered six days following treatment. For this reason, it is strongly recommended to extract DNA from treated items of evidence as soon as possible after indanedione treatment.

Two cases of threatening letters with their accompanying envelopes were received to the Division of Forensic Identification unit of the Israel Police. The envelopes, including the stamps, and the letters were initially examined for latent fingerprints by the DFO reagent, known to cause degradation of DNA. Although no latent fingerprints could be visualized on any of the items, the biology laboratory using organic DNA extraction, was successful in defining genetic profiles from all the items employing six STR loci, even after treatment with DFO. In a controlled experiment, a known donor attached a stamp, by licking, to an envelope. This item was treated with DFO and then profiled using STR loci. The results showed that previous DFO treatment on the control stamp before DNA analysis had no negative effects on obtaining the DNA profile of the known donor using STR loci.