Advertisement

Evaluation of the MiSeq FGx system for use in forensic casework

  • Jie Wu
  • Jing-Long Li
  • Meng-Lei Wang
  • Jian-Ping Li
  • Zhi-Chao Zhao
  • Qi Wang
  • Shu-Dong Yang
  • Xin Xiong
  • Jing-Long Yang
  • Ya-Jun Deng
Original Article

Abstract

Capillary electrophoresis (CE) is widely used in forensic genetics to study short tandem repeats (STRs). Recently, next-generation sequencing (NGS) platforms have facilitated the development of new strategies for forensic DNA typing. Several studies have shown that NGS successfully analyzes challenging samples. However, because NGS is complicated and time-consuming, it remains unclear whether NGS platforms offer significant advantages over CE for all forensic cases. Here, the MiSeq FGx system was used to test some cases that had previously been analyzed using CE. These cases included paternity test cases in which some samples exhibited locus inconsistencies; samples with off-ladder (OL) alleles; samples with triallelic patterns; and samples with amelogenin test abnormalities. The results generated by MiSeq FGx were compared to those previously generated by CE. The MiSeq FGx and CE results were consistent with the exception of three samples, where inconsistencies were observed at the Penta D locus. For all three incongruent samples, the MiSeq FGx results were correct. Sequence analysis indicated that, in two cases, mismatches were due to undetected alleles rather than mutations. In two additional cases, mutation sources were identified, and in a fifth case, mutation step size was reconsidered. MiSeq FGx was used to identify OL alleles and samples with amelogenin test abnormalities. For cases where verification was required via CE analysis, the simultaneous NGS amplification of several types of multiple genetic markers improved testing efficiency. In addition, we identified additional sequence variants at autosomal, Y chromosomal, and X chromosomal STR loci in the Han Chinese population from northern China. Our results will be useful for future forensic analyses of STR genotypes in Chinese populations. It is likely that NGS would be more widely used in forensic genetics if costs and procedure complexity were reduced.

Keywords

Illumina MiSeq FGx™ system Next-generation sequencing Sequence variation Forensic genetics STR Forensic casework 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Xu Liu and Jing-jing Zhang. This work was supported by the Beijing Center for Physical and Chemical Analysis, Beijing, People’s Republic of China.

Funding

This work was supported in part by a grant from the Millions of Talent Projects, China. The sponsor had no involvement in the development of the paper or decisions related to the paper.

Compliance with ethical standards

This study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

414_2018_1987_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (94 kb)
ESM 1 (XLSX 93.6 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Gettings KB, Aponte RA, Vallone PM, Butler JM (2015) STR allele sequence variation: current knowledge and future issues. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 18:118–130.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.06.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim EH, Lee HY, Yang IS, Jung SE, Yang WI, Shin KJ (2016) Massively parallel sequencing of 17 commonly used forensic autosomal STRs and amelogenin with small amplicons. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 22:1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.01.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gaag KJ, Leeuw RH, Hoogenboom J, Patel J, Storts DR, Laros JFJ, Knijff (2016) Massively parallel sequencing of short tandem repeats—population data and mixture analysis results for the PowerSeq™ system. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 24:86–96.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.05.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jäger AC, Alvarez ML, Davis CP, Guzmán E, Han Y, Way L, Walichiewicz P, Silva D, Pham N, Caves G, Bruand J, Schlesinger F, Pond SJK, Varlaro J, Stephens KM, Holt CL (2017) Developmental validation of the MiSeq FGx forensic genomics system for targeted next generation sequencing in forensic DNA casework and database laboratories. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 28:52–70.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.01.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Caratti S, Turrina S, Ferrian M, Cosentino E, Leo DD (2015) MiSeq FGx sequencing system: a new platform for forensic genetics. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics Supplement Series 5:e98–e100.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigss.2015.09.040
  6. 6.
    Liu QL, Chen ZX, Chen CG, Lu DJ (2016) Genetic polymorphism of 22 autosomal STR markers in a Han population of Southern China. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 24:e14–e16.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.06.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Illumina. Inc (2015) ForenSeq™ DNA signature prep guide. Part #15049528 Rev. DGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Illumina. Inc (2015). ForenSeq™ universal analysis software guide. Part #5053876 Rev. DGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhao F, Wu XY, Cai GQ, Xu CC (2003) The application of Modified-Powerstate software in forensic biostatistics. Chin J Forensic Med 18:297–298Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nei M, Molecular evolutionary genetics, Columbia University Press, 1987Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Novroski NMM, King JL, Churchill Jennifer D, Seah LH, Bruce B (2016) Characterization of genetic sequence variation of 58 STR loci in four major population groups. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 25:214–226.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.09.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Just RS, Moreno LI, Smerick JB, Irwin JA (2017) Performance and concordance of the ForenSeq™ system for autosomal and Y chromosome short tandem repeat sequencing of reference-type specimens. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 28:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.01.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clayton TM, Guest JL, Urquhart AJ, Gil PD (2004) A genetic basis for anomalous band patterns encountered during DNA STR profiling. J Forensic Sci 49:1207–1214.  https://doi.org/10.1520/jfs2003145 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Picanço JB, Raimann PE, Motta CHAS, Rodenbusch R, Gusmão L, Alho CS (2015) Identification of the third/extra allele for forensic application in cases with TPOX tri-allelic pattern. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 16:88–93.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.11.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Butler John M (2015) Advanced topics in forensic DNA typing: interpretation. STR alleles and amplification artifacts, pp47–86.  https://doi.org/10.1016/c2011-0-07649-4
  16. 16.
    Hansonac EK, Ballantyne J (2006) Comprehensive annotated STR physical map of the human Y chromosome: forensic implications. Legal Med 8:110–120.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2005.10.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mohammed F, Tayel SM (2005) Sex identification of normal persons and sex reverse cases from bloodstains using FISH and PCR. J Clin Forensic Med 12:122–127.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcfm.2004.08.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gelardi C, Rockenbauer E, Dalsgaard S, Børsting C, Morling N (2014) Second generation sequencing of three STRs D3S1358, D12S391 and D21S11 in Danes and a new nomenclature for sequenced STR alleles. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 12:38–41.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.04.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zeng XP, King JL, Stoljarova M, Warshauer DH, LaRue BL, Sajantila A, Patel J, Storts DR, Budowle B (2015) High sensitivity multiplex short tandem repeat loci analyses with massively parallel sequencing. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 16:38–47.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.11.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Devesse L, Ballard D, Davenport L, Riethorst I, Mason-Buck G, Court DS (2018) Concordance of the ForenSeq™ system and characterisation of sequence-specific autosomal STR alleles across two major population groups. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 34:57–61.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.10.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Morales-Valverde A, Fuente SSDL, Nuñez-Rivas G, Espinoza-Esquivel M (2009) Characterization of 12 new alleles in the STR system D18S51. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics Supplement Series 2:43–44.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigss.2009.08.172 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Raziel A, Oz C, Carmon AD, Ilsar R, Zamir A (2012) Discordance at D3S1358 locus involving SGM Plus™ and the European new generation multiplex kits. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 6:108–112.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2011.03.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Borovko S, Shyla A, Korban V, Borovko A (2015) Amelogenin test abnormalities revealed in Belarusian population during forensic DNA analysis. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics 15:98–104.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.10.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jie Wu
    • 1
  • Jing-Long Li
    • 1
  • Meng-Lei Wang
    • 1
  • Jian-Ping Li
    • 1
  • Zhi-Chao Zhao
    • 1
  • Qi Wang
    • 1
  • Shu-Dong Yang
    • 1
  • Xin Xiong
    • 1
  • Jing-Long Yang
    • 1
  • Ya-Jun Deng
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Beijing DNA EvidenceBeijingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations