Proteomics in Forensic Analysis: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Subjects: Biology
Contributor:
Van-An Duong
,
Jeong-Hun Mok

Proteomics is in the early stages of development for forensic applications. It has been used in forensics for identification of tissue and body fluid, identification and quantification of protein toxins, human individualization, detection of protein drugs and hormones in sports, and estimation of post-mortem intervals.

  • forensics
  • proteomics
  • biomarker
  • human identification
  • serology
  • hair
  • bone

1. Introduction

Proteomics is the study of proteomes (i.e., the total proteins of a given sample such as cultured cells, a tissue, or an organism) and their changes in response to environmental or physiological conditions [1]. Proteomics identifies proteome profiles of samples, thereby revealing the biological status of the samples as well as their regulatory or disease mechanisms [2]. Proteomics has been widely used to study microbiology, cell and molecular biology, plant sciences, marine sciences, food sciences, cancer, and immunology [3][4]. The development of proteomics relies on a number of technologies and techniques, including liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and statistical and bioinformatics tools [5][6].
Proteomics is a powerful approach for studying biological systems. Recent developments in LC-MS/MS have allowed rapid analyses of peptides and proteins in samples, which is comparable to next-generation sequencing (NGS). Compared with immunological methods that require antibodies and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using specific primers, proteomics may reduce time and overall analysis costs. It does not depend on the development of new antibodies or primers for specific proteins [7]. Proteomics enables the identification and quantification of various peptides and proteins in a single experiment with high specificity. Thus, it not only measures a large number of targets but also provides a holistic view of the physiological and biochemical states of given samples [2]. A proteome profile, including proteins and their abundances, provides a better global picture of a sample than static DNA information. In other words, proteomics can determine biological processes that are occurring [8].
While traditional gel-based proteomics is labor-intensive and time-consuming, the development of LC-MS/MS-based proteomics in the last two decades allows separation and analysis of thousands of peptides and proteins in several hours, which considerably increases the throughput of proteomics [9][10]. It also possesses some advantages as compared with the well-established immunoassays, such as higher specificity and repeatability, reduced time, labor, and long-term cost, the ability of multiplexing. Particularly, proteomics can avoid the requirement of genetically tagged proteins and specific antibodies for each protein [11]. In addition, the sample preparation workflow of proteomics can be automated using some liquid handling workstations. Most of the steps in bottom-up and top-down proteomics can be automated to increase precision, repeatability, and high-throughput performance [12]. In biological forensics, DNA is undoubtedly effective for human identification from various sample types, such as blood, skin, urine, and hair. However, in some cases, DNA might not answer all questions relating to forensics, such as the biological fluid or tissue type of a sample. DNA in samples is sometimes unavailable or degraded, whereas proteins can persist and thus, can be analyzed instead [13]. Proteins themselves are also the targeted biomolecules when analyzing protein toxins, protein drugs, and hormones. Therefore, proteomics can be a confirmatory and orthogonal technique for well-built DNA sequencing and an additional strategy to reveal other information. Currently, forensic proteomics is in the early stages of development. An increasing number of studies have used proteomics in forensics, such as identification of tissue and body fluid, identification and quantification of protein toxins, human individualization, detection of protein drugs and hormones in sports, and discrimination of wild strains and laboratory-adapted strains of bacteria [7].

2. Development

Our current review aims to focus on a wide range of human samples used in forensic proteomics with updated findings from the literature. They include hair, bone, body fluids (blood, urine, semen, vaginal fluid, saliva), muscle, fingernail, muscle, brain, and fingermarks. These samples are different from each other in terms of sample amount, sample availability, and protein amount. The amount of sample collected may vary depending on the forensic contexts. Some samples may have relatively low amounts, such as hair, body fluids, tissues, and their traces in fingernail and fingermark. Protein amounts are different among samples. In sport doping, urine and blood can be used. Urine usually has low protein content as compared with that of blood; however, it is easily available. Some samples, such as bone, muscle, brain, and decomposition fluid might be only available from corpses. Human samples can be used for various forensic proteomic applications. Hair is a valuable sample for identifications of ethnic groups, gender, and individual [14][15][16]. Urine and blood are being used to identify and quantify illegal peptides and small protein hormones for sport doping [17]. Some samples, such as bone, muscle, brain, cerebrospinal fluid, and decomposition fluid are used to estimate post-mortem interval (PMI) [18][19][20][21][22]. Fingernail and fingermark may contain traces of body fluids and tissues and thus, be used for their identification [23][24]. Table 1 summarizes some applications of proteomics in forensics using different types of human samples.
Table 1. Applications of forensic proteomics using human samples.
Sample Type Applications
Hair Identify ethnic groups [14]
Distinguish gender [15]
Distinguish individuals [16]
Bone Estimate biological age [18]
Estimate post-mortem interval (PMI) [18][19]
Distinguish individuals [25]
Body fluid and tissue Identify body fluids using biomarkers [26]
Identify tissues using biomarkers [27]
Urine and blood Identify and quantify illegal peptides and small protein hormones for sport doping [17][28]
Fingernail Identify body fluids and tissues trapped under fingernails [23]
Muscle Estimate mid-PMI [20]
Brain and cerebrospinal fluid Estimate PMI [21]
Identify diagnostic biomarkers for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) [29]
Blood Identify biomarkers in the postmortem diagnosis of drowning [30]
Decomposition fluid Estimate PMI [22]
Fingermark Identify traces of body fluids [24]
Determine age-markers of fingermarks [31]
Epidermal corneocyte Distinguish individuals [32]
This entry presents an overview of proteomics in forensic analysis, with a particular focus on applications in human samples. We introduce general proteomics methods that are applied in forensic studies, including sample preparation techniques, data acquisition using LC-MS/MS, and data analysis using database search, spectral library search, and de novo sequencing. Notably, we summarize recent applications in the past decade of forensic proteomics that use human samples for analysis, such as hair, bone, body fluids, muscle, fingernail, brain, blood, and fingermarks.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/app11083393

References

  1. Mike Tyers; Matthias Mann; From genomics to proteomics. Nature 2003, 422, 193-197, 10.1038/nature01510.
  2. Ruedi Aebersold; Matthias Mann; Mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Nature 2003, 422, 198-207, 10.1038/nature01511.
  3. Goyeun Yun; Jong-Moon Park; Van-An Duong; Jeong-Hun Mok; Jongho Jeon; Onyou Nam; Joonwon Lee; EonSeon Jin; Hookeun Lee; Proteomic Profiling of Emiliania huxleyi Using a Three-Dimensional Separation Method Combined with Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Molecules 2020, 25, 3028, 10.3390/molecules25133028.
  4. Dami Kwon; Jong-Moon Park; Van-An Duong; Seong-Joo Hong; Byung-Kwan Cho; Choul-Gyun Lee; Hyung-Kyoon Choi; Dong-Myung Kim; Hookeun Lee; Comparative Proteomic Profiling of Marine and Freshwater Synechocystis Strains Using Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 2020, 8, 790, 10.3390/jmse8100790.
  5. Van-An Duong; Onyou Nam; EonSeon Jin; Jong-Moon Park; Hookeun Lee; Discovery of Post-Translational Modifications in Emiliania huxleyi. Molecules 2021, 26, 2027, 10.3390/molecules26072027.
  6. Patrick G A Pedrioli; Jimmy K Eng; Robert Hubley; Mathijs Vogelzang; Eric W Deutsch; Brian Raught; Brian Pratt; Erik Nilsson; Ruth H Angeletti; Rolf Apweiler; et al. A common open representation of mass spectrometry data and its application to proteomics research. Nature Biotechnology 2004, 22, 1459-1466, 10.1038/nbt1031.
  7. Eric D. Merkley; David S. Wunschel; Karen L. Wahl; Kristin H. Jarman; Applications and challenges of forensic proteomics. Forensic Science International 2019, 297, 350-363, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.01.022.
  8. Ramazan Akçan; Burak Taştekin; Mahmut Şerif Yildirim; Halit Canberk Aydogan; Necdet Sağlam; Omics era in forensic medicine; towards a new age. TURKISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES 2020, 50, 1480-1490, 10.3906/sag-1912-197.
  9. Zhaorui Zhang; Si Wu; David L. Stenoien; Ljiljana Paša-Tolić; High-Throughput Proteomics. Annual Review of Analytical Chemistry 2014, 7, 427-454, 10.1146/annurev-anchem-071213-020216.
  10. Van-An Duong; Jong-Moon Park; Hookeun Lee; Review of Three-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography Platforms for Bottom-Up Proteomics. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2020, 21, 1524, 10.3390/ijms21041524.
  11. R. Daniel Pedde; Huiyan Li; Christoph H. Borchers; Mohsen Akbari; Microfluidic-Mass Spectrometry Interfaces for Translational Proteomics. Trends in Biotechnology 2017, 35, 954-970, 10.1016/j.tibtech.2017.06.006.
  12. Michal Alexovič; Pawel L. Urban; Hadi Tabani; Ján Sabo; Recent advances in robotic protein sample preparation for clinical analysis and other biomedical applications. Clinica Chimica Acta 2020, 507, 104-116, 10.1016/j.cca.2020.04.015.
  13. Mehdi Moini; Applications of liquid-based separation in conjunction with mass spectrometry to the analysis of forensic evidence. ELECTROPHORESIS 2018, 39, 1249-1275, 10.1002/elps.201700501.
  14. Glendon J. Parker; Tami Leppert; Deon S. Anex; Jonathan K. Hilmer; Nori Matsunami; Lisa Baird; Jeffery Stevens; Krishna Parsawar; Blythe P. Durbin-Johnson; David M. Rocke; et al. Demonstration of Protein-Based Human Identification Using the Hair Shaft Proteome. PLOS ONE 2016, 11, e0160653-e0160653, 10.1371/journal.pone.0160653.
  15. Nurdiena Mohamed Nasir; Jumriah Hiji; Jaime Jacqueline Jayapalan; Onn Haji Hashim; Potential use of human hair shaft keratin peptide signatures to distinguish gender and ethnicity. PeerJ 2020, 8, e8248, 10.7717/peerj.8248.
  16. Fanny Chu; Katelyn E. Mason; Deon S. Anex; A. Daniel Jones; Bradley R. Hart; Hair Proteome Variation at Different Body Locations on Genetically Variant Peptide Detection for Protein-Based Human Identification. Scientific Reports 2019, 9, 7641, 10.1038/s41598-019-44007-7.
  17. Paul E. Oran; Jason W. Jarvis; Chad R. Borges; Nisha D. Sherma; Randall W. Nelson; Mass spectrometric immunoassay of intact insulin and related variants for population proteomics studies. PROTEOMICS – Clinical Applications 2011, 5, 454-459, 10.1002/prca.201000112.
  18. Noemi Procopio; Anna Williams; Andrew T. Chamberlain; Michael Buckley; Forensic proteomics for the evaluation of the post-mortem decay in bones. Journal of Proteomics 2018, 177, 21-30, 10.1016/j.jprot.2018.01.016.
  19. Gemma Prieto-Bonete; María D. Pérez-Cárceles; Antonio Maurandi-López; Cristina Pérez-Martínez; Aurelio Luna; Association between protein profile and postmortem interval in human bone remains. Journal of Proteomics 2019, 192, 54-63, 10.1016/j.jprot.2018.08.008.
  20. Kyoung-Min Choi; Angela Zissler; Eunjung Kim; Bianca Ehrenfellner; Eunji Cho; Se-In Lee; Peter Steinbacher; Ki Na Yun; Jong Hwan Shin; Jin Young Kim; et al. Postmortem proteomics to discover biomarkers for forensic PMI estimation. International Journal of Legal Medicine 2019, 133, 899-908, 10.1007/s00414-019-02011-6.
  21. Erin J. Finehout; Zsofia Franck; Norman Relkin; Kelvin H. Lee; Proteomic Analysis of Cerebrospinal Fluid Changes Related to Postmortem Interval. Clinical Chemistry 2006, 52, 1906-1913, 10.1373/clinchem.2006.070508.
  22. Ashley-N’Dene Nolan; Garth Maker; Robert J. Mead; Scott Bringans; Samuel J. Speers; Peptide analysis of mammalian decomposition fluid in relation to the post-mortem interval. Forensic Science International 2020, 311, 110269, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110269.
  23. Sathisha Kamanna; Julianne Henry; Nico Voelcker; Adrian Linacre; K. Paul Kirkbride; A complementary forensic ‘proteo-genomic’ approach for the direct identification of biological fluid traces under fingernails. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 2018, 410, 6165-6175, 10.1007/s00216-018-1223-3.
  24. Sathisha Kamanna; Julianne Henry; Nicolas H. Voelcker; Adrian Linacre; K. Paul Kirkbride; A mass spectrometry-based forensic toolbox for imaging and detecting biological fluid evidence in finger marks and fingernail scrapings. International Journal of Legal Medicine 2017, 131, 1413-1422, 10.1007/s00414-017-1587-5.
  25. Katelyn Elizabeth Mason; Deon Anex; Todd Grey; Bradley Hart; Glendon Parker; Protein-based forensic identification using genetically variant peptides in human bone. Forensic Science International 2018, 288, 89-96, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.04.016.
  26. Kevin M. Legg; Roger Powell; Nichole Reisdorph; Rick Reisdorph; Phillip B. Danielson; Verification of protein biomarker specificity for the identification of biological stains by quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry. ELECTROPHORESIS 2017, 38, 833-845, 10.1002/elps.201600352.
  27. Sascha Dammeier; Sven Nahnsen; Johannes Veit; Frank Wehner; Marius Ueffing; Oliver Kohlbacher; Mass-Spectrometry-Based Proteomics Reveals Organ-Specific Expression Patterns To Be Used as Forensic Evidence. Journal of Proteome Research 2015, 15, 182-192, 10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b00704.
  28. Scott Peterman; Eric E. Niederkofler; David A. Phillips; Bryan Krastins; Urban A. Kiernan; Kemmons A. Tubbs; Dobrin Nedelkov; Amol Prakash; MaryAnn S. Vogelsang; Tara Schoeder; et al. An automated, high-throughput method for targeted quantification of intact insulin and its therapeutic analogs in human serum or plasma coupling mass spectrometric immunoassay with high resolution and accurate mass detection (MSIA-HR/AM). PROTEOMICS 2014, 14, 1445-1456, 10.1002/pmic.201300300.
  29. Kevin G. Broadbelt; Keith D. Rivera; David S. Paterson; Jhodie R. Duncan; Felicia L. Trachtenberg; Joao A. Paulo; Martha D. Stapels; Natalia S. Borenstein; Richard A. Belliveau; Elisabeth A. Haas; et al. Brainstem Deficiency of the 14-3-3 Regulator of Serotonin Synthesis: A Proteomics Analysis in the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 2012, 11, 1, 10.1074/mcp.m111.009530.
  30. Diana Hernández-Romero; Encarnación Sánchez-Rodríguez; Eduardo Osuna; Agustín Sibón; Miriam Martínez-Villanueva; José A. Noguera-Velasco; María D. Pérez-Cárceles; Proteomics in Deaths by Drowning: Diagnostic Efficacy of Apolipoprotein A1 and α-1Antitrypsin, Pilot Study. Diagnostics 2020, 10, 747, 10.3390/diagnostics10100747.
  31. Stijn Oonk; Tom Schuurmans; Martin Pabst; Louis C. P. M. De Smet; Marcel De Puit; Proteomics as a new tool to study fingermark ageing in forensics. Scientific Reports 2018, 8, 1-11, 10.1038/s41598-018-34791-z.
  32. Trevor Borja; Noreen Karim; Zachary Goecker; Michelle Salemi; Brett Phinney; Muhammad Naeem; Robert Rice; Glendon Parker; Proteomic genotyping of fingermark donors with genetically variant peptides. Forensic Science International: Genetics 2019, 42, 21-30, 10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.05.005.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
Video Production Service
Feedback