Final answer:
A double restriction digest is better than a single digest when analyzing DNA at a crime scene with possible suspects. It provides more specific and accurate results, reducing the chances of false matches. It also provides additional information about the DNA, aiding in identifying specific genetic markers or variations.
Step-by-step explanation:
When trying to match DNA found at a crime scene with possible suspects, it is better to analyze the DNA using a double restriction digest rather than a single digest for a few reasons.
Firstly, a double restriction digest provides more specific and accurate results. By using two different restriction enzymes, you obtain two different sets of fragment DNA. This allows for a more precise comparison of the DNA banding patterns between the crime scene DNA and the suspects' DNA. It helps to reduce the chances of false matches or inconclusive results.
Secondly, a double restriction digest provides additional information about the DNA. By analyzing the fragment sizes produced by two different enzymes, you can gather more information about the genetic makeup of the DNA. This can be useful in identifying specific genetic markers or variations that can further support or rule out the involvement of a suspect.
Overall, a double restriction digest is a more thorough and reliable method for DNA analysis in forensic investigations, as it provides more specific results and additional genetic information.