Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Thursday September 08 2016, @11:39PM   Printer-friendly
from the genes-are-inHAIRited dept.

A new protein analysis technique could prove complementary to DNA profiling:

U.S. Energy Department scientists say a new method of analyzing genetic mutations in proteins in human hair could lead to the first forensic technique other than DNA profiling that could reliably match biological evidence to a single person with scientific precision. In results published [open, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160653] [DX] Wednesday, researchers at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California said their early study — using hairs recovered from 76 living people and six sets of skeletal remains from London dating to the 1750s — shows the promise of hair "proteomics," or the study of proteins that genes produce.

"We are in a very similar place with protein-based identification to where DNA profiling was during the early days of its development," said Brad Hart, director of the national laboratory's Forensic Science Center and co-author of the study with lead researcher Glendon Parker. "This method will be a game-changer for forensics," Hart said, while cautioning that many steps remain before it is validated. If borne out, independent experts said, hair protein analysis could address concerns about the reliability of visual comparisons of hair strands, a technique whose subjectivity has opened it to criticism that experts' claims were frequently being overstated.

Protein analysis also could produce a valuable way to corroborate existing, cutting-edge DNA testing that draws on tiny traces or mixtures of genetic material from different people. DNA mixtures can be found in samples as small as a handful of skin cells invisible to the eye. But the interpretation of results has become more complex and controversial even as trace or low-copy DNA testing becomes one of the fastest growing areas of crime lab work.

Also at Scientific American, New Scientist, and PLOS Research News.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 09 2016, @01:47AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 09 2016, @01:47AM (#399442)

    I don't think protein sequence (except when their genes undergo recombination or mutation) would substantially change over time. The protein quality control machinery could become less efficient and let more errors through, but this would be a small fraction.

    Databases shouldn't be used anyway. To help reduce false-positives, analysis should only be done on suspects where there is enough probable cause to warrant the invasion of privacy.

  • (Score: 2) by gringer on Friday September 09 2016, @09:27AM

    by gringer (962) on Friday September 09 2016, @09:27AM (#399550)

    I don't think protein sequence (except when their genes undergo recombination or mutation) would substantially change over time.

    Ah, protein sequences. Yes, that's different; I just assumed protein expression was being carried out, because protein sequencing is difficult. So they're doing protein sequencing by mass spec [plos.org]. That should work, particularly with a comprehensive knowledge of predicted RNA sequences (e.g. from the 1000 genome project).

    --
    Ask me about Sequencing DNA in front of Linus Torvalds [youtube.com]