A semen-specific deoxyribonucleic acid methylation model for epigenetic age estimation and its robustness under environmental challenges.
DNA methylation
age estimation
degradation
environmental conditions
semen‐specific CpGs
Journal
Electrophoresis
ISSN: 1522-2683
Titre abrégé: Electrophoresis
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8204476
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Aug 2024
20 Aug 2024
Historique:
revised:
27
06
2024
received:
14
03
2024
accepted:
27
07
2024
medline:
20
8
2024
pubmed:
20
8
2024
entrez:
20
8
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
In forensic investigations, semen samples are a common form of biological evidence, especially in cases involving sexual assault. Therefore, accurately estimating the age of an individual is crucial in criminal cases. This study presents a novel age estimation model based on semen-specific CpG methylation patterns. A multiplex panel was developed, consisting of 12 CpG sites (PARP14, C5orf25, cg23488376, MXRA5, PFKFB3, DLL1, NOX4, cg12837463, TTC7B, KCNA7, NKX2-1, and SYNE4), which exhibit strong correlations with age. Additionally, this study investigates the resilience of these methylation markers under simulated environmental challenges. We collected ejaculate samples from a diverse cohort of 115 male individuals, aged 20-71 years, who underwent deoxyribonucleic acid extraction and bisulfite conversion. Methylation levels of the selected CpG sites were assessed using a SNaPshot assay, which revealed significant correlations with chronological age. We developed and validated two robust age estimation models through stepwise and enter regression analyses, achieving reliable accuracy with mean absolute errors ranging from 3.81 to 4.1 years. Additionally, the study also investigated the robustness of semen stains under diverse environmental conditions, including fabric type, washing, hematin exposure, and UV-C light. The selected methylation markers demonstrated remarkable resilience despite the challenges posed by washing procedures and environmental exposure, confirming their potential for age estimation in forensic genetics. This research presents successful age estimation models, emphasizing the strong correlations between methylation levels and chronological age. The proposed methodology's accuracy is affirmed through model validation on an independent test set, while also highlighting the resilience of semen stains on fabrics under varying storage and washing conditions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39162072
doi: 10.1002/elps.202400054
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Istanbul University-Cerrahpasa, Scientific Research and Projects Unit
ID : 35912
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Electrophoresis published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH.
Références
Jung M, Pfeifer GP. Aging and DNA methylation. BMC Biol. 2015;13:7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915‐015‐0118‐4
Eipel M, Mayer F, Arent T, Ferreira MRP, Birkhofer C, Gerstenmaier U, et al. Epigenetic age predictions based on buccal swabs are more precise in combination with cell type‐specific DNA methylation signatures. Aging. 2016;8:1034–1048. https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.100972
Zha S, Wei X, Fang R, Wang Q, Lin H, Zhang K, et al. Estimation of the age of human semen stains by attenuated total reflection Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy: a preliminary study. Forensic Sci Res. 2020;5:119–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2019.1642567
Lee H‐C, Pang C‐Y, Hsu H‐S, Wei Y‐H. Differential accumulations of 4,977 bp deletion in mitochondrial DNA of various tissues in human ageing. Biochim Biophys Acta, Mol Basis Dis. 1994;1226:37–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0925‐4439(94)90056‐6
Meissner C, Ritz‐Timme S. Molecular pathology and age estimation. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;203:34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.07.010
Aubert G, Lansdorp PM. Telomeres and aging. Physiol Rev. 2008;88:557–579. https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00026.2007
Tsuji A, Ishiko A, Takasaki T, Ikeda N. Estimating age of humans based on telomere shortening. Forensic Sci Int. 2002;126:197–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379‐0738(02)00086‐5
Nass N, Bartling B, Navarrete Santos A, Scheubel RJ, Börgermann J, Silber RE, et al. Advanced glycation end products, diabetes and ageing. Z Gerontol Geriatr. 2007;40:349–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391‐007‐0484‐9
Pilin A, Pudil F, Bencko V. Changes in colour of different human tissues as a marker of age. Int J Legal Med. 2007;121:158–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414‐006‐0136‐4
Zubakov D, Liu F, Van Zelm MC, Vermeulen J, Oostra BA, Van Duijn CM, et al. Estimating human age from T‐cell DNA rearrangements. Curr Biol. 2010;20:R970–R971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2010.10.022
Paparazzo E, Geracitano S, Lagani V, Bartolomeo D, Aceto MA, D'Aquila P, et al. A blood‐based molecular clock for biological age estimation. Cells. 2022;12:32. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells12010032
Chukwuma Sr C. Characterization of the clinical and molecular perspectives of epigenetics. Arch Clin Invest. 2022;1:1–7. https://doi.org/10.31579/2834‐8087/003
Kader F, Ghai M. DNA methylation and application in forensic sciences. Forensic Sci Int. 2015;249:255–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.01.037
Hanafi MS, Soedarsono N, Auerkari E. Biological age estimation using DNA methylation analysis: a systematic review. Sci Dent J. 2021;5:1. https://doi.org/10.4103/SDJ.SDJ_27_20
Lee HY, Jung S‐E, Oh YN, Choi A, Yang WI, Shin K‐J. Epigenetic age signatures in the forensically relevant body fluid of semen: a preliminary study. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2015;19:28–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.05.014
Jenkins TG, Aston KI, Cairns B, Smith A, Carrell DT. Paternal germ line aging: DNA methylation age prediction from human sperm. BMC Genomics. 2018;19:763. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864‐018‐5153‐4
Cao M, Shao X, Chan P, Cheung W, Kwan T, Pastinen T, et al. High‐resolution analyses of human sperm dynamic methylome reveal thousands of novel age‐related epigenetic alterations. Clin Epigenet. 2020;12:192. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13148‐020‐00988‐1
Pisarek A, Pośpiech E, Heidegger A, Xavier C, Papież A, Piniewska‐Róg D, et al. Epigenetic age prediction in semen—marker selection and model development. Aging. 2021;13:19145–19164. https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.203399
Sapan TÜ, Güngör A, Sandıkçı N, Kocabaş A, Atasoy S. DNA recovery and human identification from semen stains washed at different temperatures. Int J Legal Med. 2023;137:303–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414‐022‐02937‐4
Avicenna F, Yudianto A, I'tishom R, Wungu CDK. Effect of machine‐washing semen‐stained fabrics on the persistence of human spermatozoa DNA: a systematic review of five articles. Leg Med. 2023;60:102179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2022.102179
Schulze Johann K, Bauer H, Wiegand P, Pfeiffer H, Vennemann M. Detecting DNA damage in stored blood samples. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2023;19:50–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024‐022‐00549‐3
Cossette M‐L, Stotesbury T, Shafer ABA. Quantifying visible absorbance changes and DNA degradation in aging bloodstains under extreme temperatures. Forensic Sci Int. 2021;318:110627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110627
Abdel Hady RH, Thabet HZ, Ebrahem NE, Yassa HA. Thermal effects on DNA degradation in blood and seminal stains: forensic view. Acad Forensic Pathol. 2021;11:7–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1925362121998547
Asari M, Matsuura H, Isozaki S, Hoshina C, Okuda K, Tanaka H, et al. Assessment of DNA degradation of buccal cells under humid conditions and DNA repair by DOP‐PCR using locked nucleic acids. Leg Med. 2018;35:29–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2018.09.005
Brayley‐Morris H, Sorrell A, Revoir AP, Meakin GE, Court DS, Morgan RM. Persistence of DNA from laundered semen stains: implications for child sex trafficking cases. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2015;19:165–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.07.016
Noël S, Lagacé K, Raymond S, Granger D, Loyer M, Bourgoin S, et al. Repeatedly washed semen stains: optimal screening and sampling strategies for DNA analysis. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2019;38:9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.10.002
Mussabekova SA. Possibilities of semen stain identification after clothing and bedding washing in investigating cases of sexual assault. Per Tchê Quim. 2020;17:93–111. https://doi.org/10.52571/PTQ.v17.n34.2020.111_P34_pgs_93_111.pdf
Basyoni HA, Mohamed KM, El‐Barrany UM, Rashed LA, Aboubakr HM, Razik HAA. How possible is it to recover semen DNA from laundered cotton and polyester fabrics? Indian J Forensic Med Toxicol. 2020;14:2941–2948. https://doi.org/10.37506/ijfmt.v14i4.12037
Li L, Song F, Lang M, Hou J, Wang Z, Prinz M, et al. Methylation‐based age prediction using pyrosequencing platform from seminal stains in Han Chinese males. J Forensic Sci. 2020;65:610–619. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556‐4029.14186
Freire‐Aradas A, Pośpiech E, Aliferi A, Girón‐Santamaría L, Mosquera‐Miguel A, Pisarek A, et al. A comparison of forensic age prediction models using data from four DNA methylation technologies. Front Genet. 2020;11:932. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2020.00932
Refn MR, Kampmann M‐L, Morling N, Tfelt‐Hansen J, Børsting C, Pereira V. Prediction of chronological age and its applications in forensic casework: methods, current practices, and future perspectives. Forensic Sci Res. 2023;8:85–97. https://doi.org/10.1093/fsr/owad021
Farmen RK, Cortez P, Frøyland ES. Spermatozoa recovered on laundered clothing. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Ser. 2008;1:418–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigss.2007.10.218
Parker C. The relative recoverability of DNA and RNA profiles from forensically relevant body fluid stains [Electronic theses and dissertations]. Orlando, FL: University of Central Florida; 2011. 1948.
Nakanishi H, Hara M, Takahashi S, Takada A, Saito K. Evaluation of forensic examination of extremely aged seminal stains. Leg Med. 2014;16:303–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2014.04.002
Lee JW, Choung CM, Jung JY, Lee HY, Lim S‐K. A validation study of DNA methylation‐based age prediction using semen in forensic casework samples. Leg Med. 2018;31:74–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2018.01.005
Li Z, Li Y, Liu N, Yuan F, Liu F, Liu J, et al. Typing of semen‐containing mixtures using ARMS‐based semen‐specific CpG‐InDel/STR markers. Int J Legal Med. 2022;136:1163–1176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414‐022‐02843‐9
Al Kandari NM, Singh J, Sangar VC. Time‐dependent effects of temperature and humidity on quantity of DNA in samples of human saliva, blood and semen in Kuwait. Int J Pharm Sci Res. 2016;7:2852–2873. https://doi.org/10.13040/IJPSR.0975‐8232.7(7).2852‐73
Jobin RM, De Gouffe M. The persistence of seminal constituents on panties after laundering. Significance to investigations of sexual assault. Can Soc Forensic Sci J. 2003;36:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00085030.2003.10757551
Nolan A, Speers SJ, Murakami J, Chapman B. A pilot study: the effects of repeat washing and fabric type on the detection of seminal fluid and spermatozoa. Forensic Sci Int. 2018;289:51–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.05.021
Hsieh YL. Chemical structure and properties of cotton. In: Gordon S, Hsieh Y‐L, editors. Cotton: science and technology. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing; 2006. p. 3–34.
Luo Q, Gao P, Zhou J, Zhang J, Wu W, Cao J, et al. Imparting flame resistance to citric acid–modified cotton fabrics using DNA. J Eng Fibers Fabr. 2020;15:155892502092221. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558925020922217
Silva DSBS, Antunes J, Balamurugan K, Duncan G, Alho CS, McCord B. Developmental validation studies of epigenetic DNA methylation markers for the detection of blood, semen and saliva samples. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2016;23:55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.01.017
Miao X, Shen Y, Gong X, Yu H, Li B, Chang L, et al. A novel forensic panel of 186‐plex SNPs and 123‐plex STR loci based on massively parallel sequencing. Int J Legal Med. 2021;135:709–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414‐020‐02403‐z
Tao R, Chen C, Sheng X, Xia R, Zhang X, Zhang J, et al. Validation of the investigator 24‐plex QS kit: a 6‐dye multiplex PCR assay for forensic application in the Chinese Han population. Forensic Sci Res. 2022;7:172–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2019.1665160
Fan H, Wang L, Liu C, Lu X, Xu X, Ru K, et al. Development and validation of a novel 133‐plex forensic STR panel (52 STRs and 81 Y‐STRs) using single‐end 400 bp massive parallel sequencing. Int J Legal Med. 2022;136:447–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414‐021‐02738‐1
Yao Y, Sun K, Yang Q, Zhou Z, Qian J, Li Z, et al. Development of a multiplex panel with 31 multi‐allelic InDels for forensic DNA typing. Int J Legal Med. 2023;137:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414‐022‐02907‐w
Poojary B, Andhare V. Effect of ultraviolet radiation on DNA fragmentation of human spermatozoa. Indian J Appl Res. 2017;7:520–521. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.20378.75202
Gršković B, Zrnec D, Popović M, Petek MJ, Primorac D, Mršić G. Effect of ultraviolet C radiation on biological samples. Croat Med J. 2013;54:263–271. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2013.54.263
Rahi GS, Adams JL, Yuan J, Devone D‐J‐N, Lodhi KM. Whole human blood DNA degradation associated with artificial ultraviolet and solar radiations as a function of exposure time. Forensic Sci Int. 2021;319:110674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110674