dnatrack is a work in progress — updates ship daily. Report a bug or request a feature →

Beware of the possibility of fingerprinting techniques transferring DNA.

Journal of forensic sciences, 2005

Study Design

Addressed Question

Possibilities of inhibition in the process of DNA fingerprint brushes transferring DNA

Activity Context

Professional

Category

PersistenceRecoveryTransfer Scenario

Specifications

ExtractionPersistence with TimeTransfer via Vector

Variables of Interest

presence of DNA fingerprinting powderextraction method

Stringency of Control

Controlled

Number of Individuals

6 brushes

Replicates per Individual and Condition

1

Nucleic Acid

DNA

Bodily Origin

saliva

Depositor & Contact

Depositor Characteristics

N/A

Criteria for Shedder Status

N/A

Previous Activities

N/A

Contact Scenario

contamination of brush with saliva - delay - brushing over 6 sheets of plastic - sampling

Primary Substrate

Primary Substrate Type

fingerprint brush

Primary Substrate Material

Squirrel Hair

Deposit

dipping into liquid saliva

Delay

4 months, conditions n.s.

Secondary Substrate

Secondary Substrate Type

plastic sheets

Secondary Substrate Material

Plastic

Secondary Substrate Contact

brushing

Further Transfer

N/A

Sampling

Background DNA on Sampled Surface

Negative (Confirmed)

Sampling Time

direct

Persistence

N/A

Sampling Method

direct extraction

Sampling Area

from plastic sheets or brush bristles

Laboratory Analysis

Extraction

Chelex 100 5%, Centricon-Microcon or Centricon-QIAquick-Microcon

DNA Quantification

QuantiBlot

Input for Profiling

100% of extract

Profiling

AmpFlSTR Profiler Plus, ABI Prism 310 Genetic Analyzer, GeneScan analysis and Genotyper software, threshold: 100 rfu

Reference Samples

taken from previous users of the brushes

Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis

comparison to reference profiles and determination of the number of alleles observed

RNA Data Interpretation

N/A

Results

DNA Quantity

N/A

Profile Quality

partial profiles when QIAquick was not used, full profiles when QIAquick was used

Parameter Used for Comparison

number of alleles detected, peak height (rfu)

Summary of Results

DNA can be transferred via brush that has been heavily contaminated 4 months earlier; the usage of QIAquick in addition to Microcon-Centricon devices leads to a more complete profile recovery and higher average peak areas, thus aids in removing inhibitory fingerprinting powder

Raised Questions

N/A

Cautionary Remarks

quantification results n.s.; amplification results without fingerprinting powder not shown as comparison