2016
DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.13087
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

DNA Profiling Success Rates from Degraded Skeletal Remains in Guatemala

Abstract: No data are available regarding the success of DNA Short Tandem Repeat (STR) profiling from degraded skeletal remains in Guatemala. Therefore, DNA profiling success rates relating to 2595 skeletons from eleven cases at the Forensic Anthropology Foundation of Guatemala (FAFG) are presented. The typical postmortem interval was 30 years. DNA was extracted from bone powder and amplified using Identifiler and Minifler. DNA profiling success rates differed between cases, ranging from 50.8% to 7.0%, the overall succe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…<17 years old), the rate of recovery of profile is up to 38.9%, which is fairly high compared to that of adults (25%). 20 Davoren et al reported that 0.25-9.58 ng/g of DNA was obtained using the QIA Quick kit method and 0.0016-4.48 ng/g using the organic extraction method from unburied unburnt human bones. 21 In another study, 0.0-147.7 ng/g of DNA was obtained using the Qiagen kit method and 0-605 ng/g using the organic extraction method from human skeletal remains.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…<17 years old), the rate of recovery of profile is up to 38.9%, which is fairly high compared to that of adults (25%). 20 Davoren et al reported that 0.25-9.58 ng/g of DNA was obtained using the QIA Quick kit method and 0.0016-4.48 ng/g using the organic extraction method from unburied unburnt human bones. 21 In another study, 0.0-147.7 ng/g of DNA was obtained using the Qiagen kit method and 0-605 ng/g using the organic extraction method from human skeletal remains.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, advances have been made in extraction techniques and amplification kits to reduce the amount of biological material destroyed during the DNA isolation procedure. Optimizing the DNA extraction process and increased sensitivity of DNA kits has allowed laboratories to slowly decrease the amount of starting material needed for the extraction process, allowing for minimal destruction of the skeletal materials [39,40,46,48,49]. Many studies [15,29–32] have investigated the relationship between skeletal element (bone type) and DNA yield as a way to sample skeletal remains based on the likelihood of generating an informative DNA profile.…”
Section: Skeletal Dna Extractionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This provides information on the amplification efficiency of different types of decomposed biological samples considered in the study. Although teeth are preferred over soft tissues since its robust nature preserves DNA for a longer duration (Johnston and Stephenson 2016). Even after being buried in the garden soil for the duration of 10 months, no substantial difference could be seen in the profile quality of teeth samples.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Personal identification or establishing the identity of an individual is always a challenge for social and medico-legal purposes, especially in cases of natural mass disasters like floods, earthquakes, cases of fire deaths (Heinrich et al 2009;Dumache et al 2016), tsunamis, landslides and serious vehicular/train accidents; plane crashes (Hsu et al 1999); and skeletal remains from mass graves (Prado et al 1997;Johnston and Stephenson, 2016) or man-made disasters such as terrorist attacks; bomb blasts (Holland et al 2003); and mass murders also lead to multiple fatalities. In such situations, it is difficult to establish an identity with high accuracy of individuals many a times.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%