Assessment of the transfer, persistence, prevalence and recovery of DNA traces from clothing: An inter-laboratory study on worn upper garments
FSI Genetics, 2019
Study Design
Addressed Question
Inter-laboratory study on the composition of background DNA on upper garments worn on working as well as non-working days
Activity Context
Category
Specifications
Variables of Interest
Stringency of Control
Number of Individuals
4 laboratories x 4 individuals
Replicates per Individual and Condition
1
Nucleic Acid
Bodily Origin
Depositor & Contact
Depositor Characteristics
Details on individuals' sex, hair length, living and working conditions provided in supp. Material
Criteria for Shedder Status
N/A
Previous Activities
recorded in questionnaires and taken into consideration when interpreting findings (but n.s.)
Contact Scenario
wearing garments in real-life situations on a working/non-working day - packaging - sampling
Primary Substrate
Primary Substrate Type
upper garments with long sleeves and a close front, details on fabric and fit provided in supp. Material
Primary Substrate Material
Deposit
wearing for a whole working/non-working day (wearing times ranging from 6 to 15 h)
Delay
N/A
Secondary Substrate
Secondary Substrate Type
N/A
Secondary Substrate Material
N/A
Secondary Substrate Contact
N/A
Further Transfer
N/A
Sampling
Background DNA on Sampled Surface
Sampling Time
delayed
Persistence
packaging clothing item into paper/plastic exhibit bag and submission to laboratory for sampling, duration between wearing and sampling: 0-48 days
Sampling Method
Lab 1: inhouse polyvinyl chloride tape stubs; Lab 2: Minitape (SceneSafe FAST); Lab 3: Minitape (SceneSafe FAST); Lab 4: wet-dry double swabbing (Copan cotton swabs)
Sampling Area
Inner right and left cuff, inner right forearm, inner right armpit, external back, external breast, external collar, internal collar (pictures provided in supp. Material)
Laboratory Analysis
Extraction
Lab 1: QIAamp, robotic, final volume: 100 µl; Lab 2: Chelex, manual, final volume: 100 µl; Lab 3: EZ1 advanced, manual and robotic, final volume: 100 µl; Lab 4: DNA IQ, robotic, final volume: 60 µl
DNA Quantification
Lab 1: in-house ALU assay; Lab 2: Quantifiler HP; Lab 3: Quantifiler Trio; Lab 4: Quantifiler Trio
Input for Profiling
Lab 1: 0.45-0.6 ng desired, max. 8 µl; Lab 2: 0.6-0.7 ng desired, max. 17.5 µl; Lab 3: 1 ng desired, max. 10 µl; Lab 4: 0.5 ng desired, max. 15 µl
Profiling
Lab 1: NGM (29 cycles), 3130xL Analyzer, 50 rfu threshold, no replicates; Lab 2: PowerPlex ESX16fast (30 cycles), 3500 Analyzer, dye-specific analytical threshold, duplicate analysis; Lab 3: NGM SElect (29 cycles), 3500xL Analyzer, 175 rfu threshold, no replicates; Lab 4: PowerPlex 21 (30 cycles), 3500xL Analyzer, 175 rfu threshold, additional amplification if number of contributors unable to be determined
Reference Samples
taken from all participants and, individuals inhabiting the same environments (home and workplace)
Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis
collective interpretation performed by Lab 4 using STRmix (v2.4.05) and lab-specific settings (determined with assistance from software developer's)
RNA Data Interpretation
N/A
Results
DNA Quantity
large range of DNA yields from 0 up to >300 ng
Profile Quality
variable profile composition with the wearer detected as a major or single contributor in the majority of profiles
Parameter Used for Comparison
DNA yield (ng), Minimum number of contributors (MNC), profile compositions (single source, major, minor contributors)
Summary of Results
DNA yields differed between laboratories with Lab 2 and 4 obtaining lower DNA yields than Lab 1 and 3; DNA yields showed a large variability between sampling areas with some recurring trends: low median DNA yields from the external armpit, high median DNA yields from the external breast; Interindividual differences irrespective of sampling location observed; extreme outliers (>100 ng) observed in 5 samples, which cannot be explained by any of the activities reported by the corresponding participants in comparison to other situations; clear interindividual differences not observed for Lab 4; no consistent trend regarding the correlation between log DNA yield and MNC observed for the four participating laboratories; two-person mixtures more frequently observed by Lab 1 and 2, three-person mixtures more frequently observed by Lab 3 and 4; increased MNC observed in profiles from the external back, breast and inner forearm, lower MNCs in in samples from the external armpit and internal collar, possibly due to the way these sampling locations are exposed to/shielded from the surrounding environment; in general, the wearer was mostly detected as the major (51.1%) or only (19.2%) contributor, but in rare cases the wearer was a minor contributor (2.5%) or even excluded (2.5%); profile composition and detection of additional contributors seemed to be dependent on activities performed while wearing; on Working days: mostly mixtures with wearer as major contributor, associates observed in 45 profiles on 22 occasions (avg. 2 areas/garment, mostly inhabitant partner, less frequently work colleague), detection of associates with a description of contact or spending time in a shared environment with that associate on the corresponding day in questionnaires (but several occasions of such contacts did not result in detection of the associate), one extreme finding: partner detected as a major contributor on the back on a garment where hugging that partner had been described approx. 9 h prior to removing the garment, large proportion of profiles with unknown contributors, but never as major or only contributor; on Non-working days: greater variation in profile composition compared to working days, wearer less often observed as major or only contributor, associates observed in 94 profiles on 27 separate occasions (avg. 3.5 areas/garment, mostly inhabiting partner, inhabiting children), on days where associates were observed participants had spent a large part of their day (>3 h) in the shared environment and direct or indirect contact by the associate has been described, 5 cases of an unidentified donor as a single or major contributor (3 cases most likely attributable to inhabiting child where no reference profile was available); for internal sampling areas, the wearer was more likely detected as a single contributor from collars compared to cuffs and more likely detected as a major contributor in mixtures in cuffs compared to collars; collars from shirts more often resulted in single wearer profiles than corresponding neck areas from jumpers/tops; Detailed overview of quantification and profiling outcomes provided in supp. Material
Raised Questions
N/A
Cautionary Remarks
due to the large number of variables considered under realistic conditions, the variables cannot be evaluated independently; folding and packaging of garments may have led to a redistribution of biological material on the garments