U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Gender Identification Differences Observed For DNA Quantification Versus STR Genotyping of Mummified Human Remains-How it Relates to Human Identifications in Forensic Science

NCJ Number
233724
Journal
Investigative Sciences Journal Volume: 1 Issue: 1 Dated: October 2009 Pages: 1-10
Author(s)
Kate M. Reidy; Amanda Gareis; Dahong Sun; Richard AuClair; Tracey Wong; Rachel Lang; Haiying Meng; Heather Miller Coyle; Henry C. Lee; Albert B. Harper
Date Published
October 2009
Length
10 pages
Annotation
This study compared different processes for conducting DNA quantification on mummified human remains.
Abstract
DNA testing of human remains is an important identification technology, especially after major mass disasters. It is particularly useful for cases where the remains are highly fragmented such as in bombings and explosions of airplanes and buildings. Bone and tissue in these disaster circumstances can be exposed to high heat and extreme drying conditions, analogous to what is observed in mummified remains. Bone and tissue from mummified human remains found in a subterranean cave in the Gobi Desert in Mongolia were donated to the Henry C. Lee Institute of Forensic Science to determine the gender of the samples using traditional forensic DNA methods. The goals of this project were to (1) determine if DNA could be recovered, (2) quantify the recovered DNA and (3) determine if genotyping was possible. Human DNA was obtained from these samples and evaluated using the Applied Biosystems 7500 Real-Time PCR System. The results showed that quantifiable amounts of both total human and male-specific human DNA were present. When these samples were genotyped, some differences between the Real-Time PCR system and the Minifiler genotyping system were observed. An explanation for these observations and the potential value for using two different gender identification genes (AMEL and SRY) with highly degraded bone and tissue samples will be presented. (Published Abstract) Figures, tables, and references