Premium
Screening Biological Stains with q PCR versus Lateral Flow Immunochromatographic Test Strips: A Quantitative Comparison using Analytical Figures of Merit
Author(s) -
Simson Oechsle Crystal,
Haddad Sandra,
Sgueglia Joanne B.,
Grgicak Catherine M.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
journal of forensic sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.715
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1556-4029
pISSN - 0022-1198
DOI - 10.1111/1556-4029.12284
Subject(s) - semen , detection limit , saliva , chromatography , chemistry , microbiology and biotechnology , biology , genetics , biochemistry
Biological fluid identification is an important facet of evidence examination in forensic laboratories worldwide. While identifying bodily fluids may provide insight into which downstream DNA methods to employ, these screening techniques consume a vital portion of the available evidence, are usually qualitative, and rely on visual interpretation. In contrast, q PCR yields information regarding the amount and proportion of amplifiable genetic material. In this study, dilution series of either semen or male saliva were prepared in either buffer or female blood. The samples were subjected to both lateral flow immunochromatographic test strips and q PCR analysis. Analytical figures of merit—including sensitivity, minimum distinguishable signal ( MDS ) and limit of detection ( LOD )—were calculated and compared between methods. By applying the theory of the propagation of random errors, LOD s were determined to be 0.05 μL of saliva for the RSID ™ S aliva cards, 0.03 μL of saliva for Q uantifiler ® D uo, and 0.001 μL of semen for Q uantifiler ® D uo. In conclusion, quantitative PCR was deemed a viable and effective screening method for subsequent DNA profiling due to its stability in different matrices, sensitivity, and low limits of detection.