Human complexity is often identified by biologists, dentists, anthropologists, and chemists. Human identification using DNA profile is the most widely used technique in forensic medicine. The use of short tandem repeat (STR) sequences is an accurate method for identifying individuals (
1). In many instances, tooth or bone samples are the only source of DNA for individual and kinship identification from degraded human remains (
2,
3). Based on these sequences, commercial kits have been developed, which are used in forensic centers to identify humans. Natural disasters lead to the destruction or disintegration of corpses; the bacterial degradation of soft tissues (blood samples, muscle tissue) occurs in a relatively short period of time (
4,
5). Any damage to DNA with STR sequences makes identifying the individual difficult. Since soft tissues and blood decay faster after death, lots of damages would be caused to the DNA structure. On the other hand, hard tissues such as bones and teeth result in the stability of cellular tissue against decay due to their structural nature. Teeth and their composition, as well as their location in the jaw, provide better conditions to protect DNA and are an important source of DNA extraction in most cases. Teeth and their chemical analysis, in addition to determining a person’s year of birth, can also determine the date of death in some cases (
6). The use of hard tissues such as teeth is known as one of the most suitable sources of DNA for genetic profiling of individuals even after several years from death (
7). However, not all tooth samples contain sufficient amounts or quality of genomic DNA for STR analysis. The contamination of forensic samples with exogenous human DNA because of mishandling during recovery or processing remains an issue in many analyses (
8,
9).
DNA extraction is performed based on the release of the cell genome, the removal of protein and chemical contaminants from it, and the preparation of pure DNA (
10). As we know, research on DNA extraction in forensic medicine is associated with problems because endogenous DNA is generally present in small amounts and different levels of degradation. Currently, there are many applications of DNA extraction methods from teeth that can recover DNA. Given this, several techniques have been published, all of which aim to maximize DNA yields (
11,
12). In most of the conventional techniques for DNA extraction from teeth, the powdered tissue technique is used to extract DNA. These methods rely on grinding the samples into a fine powder to produce higher yields. However, the greater level of sample manipulation increases the risk for contamination. Selection of tooth depends on availability and many other logistical and environmental factors at the time of sampling.
Despite the increasing research conducted on tooth tissues in genetics, little reliable information has been published, and the results of various methods are limited Although many studies have been done in the field of bone tissue and extraction methods, few studies have been carried out in the field of teeth, and they do not have much depth. However, many methods have been proposed for tooth sampling. Some of these methods aim at sourcing pulp and/or dentine and include horizontal (
13) or vertical sectioning (
14) and regular (
15) or apical (
16) endodontic access, with subsequent scraping or drilling (
17) of the interior of the tooth. Other methods simply grind up all or part of the tooth by crushing between two steel plates (
17), or grinding with a mortar and pestle (
13), bone mill, blender (
18), tissue grinder (
19), or cryogenic grinder (
20).
Adler et al. (
21) demonstrated that higher drill speeds had a negative impact on mtDNA recovery from ancient teeth and suggested that cutting or powdering should be performed at low speeds to reduce the heat and thus minimize the damage to the DNA.
Schwartz et al. (
22) examined nuclear DNA yield from pulp recovered from teeth separated from the jaws. In this research, the teeth were subjected to changes in pH, temperature, moisture, and burial condition from periods one week to six months. Similarly, Alvarez Garcia et al. (
23) also examined nuclear DNA yields from teeth separated from the jaws that were subjected to varying environments. Both experimental studies determined no significant effect of temperature on their ability to retrieve nuclear DNA. Perhaps the effects of temperature are more pronounced over longer time frames.
Tilotta et al. (
24) compared the nuclear DNA from teeth crushed to those in which the pulp remnants were sampled via regular endodontic access and noted a significantly higher yield from the teeth sampled via the more conservative technique. In this instance, 90% and 70% success rates for mtDNA and nuclear DNA recovery from teeth, respectively, dating back to 300 BC and 1600 AD were reported.
A method allowing repatriation of teeth with the body after sampling was demonstrated by Shiroma (
25). In this method, the tooth is cut horizontally by sampling the pulp and dentin through a perforated hole inside the tooth, which is connected with wax after the sampling is completed.
In hard tissues, due to the presence of calcium-rich structures, having access to the cell’s structure would be very difficult (
19). One of the most common features of DNA extraction techniques is the removal of calcium from hard tissues. The use of different buffers and temperatures have been suggested for this purpose. Buffers containing ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) play an important role in removing or reducing the amount of calcium by removing dual-capacity ions like calcium. By removing calcium from hard tissues, DNA-containing cell’s structures would be available, and DNA can be extracted using conventional methods (
26,
27).