Comparison of DNA profiles from samples collected from underneath fingernails and hand deposits following everyday activity
Forensic Science International: Genetics, 2026
Authors
Journal
Forensic Science International: Genetics
Study Design
Addressed Question
comparability of source and amount of foreign DNA in palm prints compared to under fingernails; comparability of the shedder classification as determined by handprints on plastic tubes, under fingernails and by cell counting in fingerprints on glass slides
Activity Context
Category
Specifications
Variables of Interest
Stringency of Control
Number of Individuals
25
Replicates per Individual and Condition
1
Nucleic Acid
Bodily Origin
Depositor & Contact
Depositor Characteristics
12 male, 13 female; demographic and pre-deposit activity collected in supplementary file; shedder status distributions depending on method of assignment
Criteria for Shedder Status
Assigned by three methods: 1 - Cell counting from fingerprint deposits, 2 - tube holding with hands, 3 - sampling from under fingernails. For each test, categories were assigned as: Intermediate: mean+/-1 standard deviation, low: <-1 standard deviation from mean, high: > 1 standard deviation from mean
Previous Activities
n.s. (assessed via questionnaire and presented in Supp. data file)
Contact Scenario
Fingerprint deposit - tube holding - fingernails swabing - immediate sampling
Primary Substrate
Primary Substrate Type
body parts (fingernails), plastic tube, glass slide
Primary Substrate Material
Deposit
1 (glass): fingerprint from left and right index finger for 15s, 2 (plastic tube): gripping of plastic tube for 15s, 3: n.a.
Delay
none
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
immediately
Persistence
n.a.
Sampling Method
1(glass): not sampled, 2(plastic tubes): wet/dry swabbing (Sarstedt XL forensic swabs), 3(fingernails): wet swabbing technique with a MWE Dryswab
Sampling Area
1(glass): not sampled, 2(plastic tubes): entire tube surface, 3(fingernails): under all five fingernails from one hand
Laboratory Analysis
Extraction
DNA IQ™ System (Promega) following the manufacturer’s protocol (final elution volume was 60 µL)
DNA Quantification
Quantifiler™ Trio DNA quantification kit
Input for Profiling
0.5 ng, or 15 µL if the concentration was ≤ 0.033 ng/µL
Profiling
PowerPlex®21 kit (Promega) in a final volume of 25 µL (30 cycles), 3500xl Genetic Analyser (ThermoFisher Scientific) using a 24 s injection at 1.2 kV
Reference Samples
from all participants and all cohabitants of the participants over the age of 18, which were identified as either being the participant’s partner, the participant’s child, the participant’s parents and siblings or another adult
Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis
Genemapper ID-X (v1.6), AT: 175 rfu; Mixture deconvolution, mixture proportion assignment and likelihood ratio calculations (no minimum threshold was used for inclusions) were performed using STRmix™ (v2.9)
RNA Data Interpretation
n.a.
Results
DNA Quantity
1(glass): n.a. (cell counts (entire finger grids) ranged from 506 to 14,334 (av. 3032 cells per print)), 2(plastic tubes): 0 to 18.84 ng (av. 1.51 ng), 3(fingernails): 5.23 ng to 478.5 ng (av. 45.24 ng)
Profile Quality
1(glass): n.a., 2(plastic tubes): mostly full profiles, approx 2/3 mixtures, 3(fingernails): full profiles, approx. 2/3 mixtures
Parameter Used for Comparison
DNA amount, proportion of non-self DNA, origin of non-self DNA, shedder category
Summary of Results
1(glass): cell counts (entire finger grids) ranged from 506 to 14,334 (av. 3032 cells per print), entire finger more representative for shedding assessment than assessment based on selected grids, 2(plastic tubes): only self DNA in approx. 1/3 of samples, non-self DNA mostly partner or cohabitating parents/children, mixture inversion observed in six samples (all from partner), influencing factors: sex (self DNA male > female, no difference for non-self DNA), age (no difference, but slightly declining trend with older age), sweating (higher in self-reported hand-sweating individuals), skin conditions, handwashing (no effect observed), hand dominance (no effect), hand size (no effect), residential location (no effect), workplace (higher amounts of non-self DNA for indoor workers), 3(fingernails): only self DNA in approx. 1/3 of samples, non-self DNA mostly partner or cohabitating parents/children, mixture inversion observed in a single sample (from partner), influencing factors: sex (no difference in self DNA, more non-self DNA in females), age (no difference among age groups (18-76+), fingernail length (no difference among length groups), nail biting (higher amounts of self DNA), hand dominance (more self DNA under non-dominant hand nails), hand washing (no difference observed), self-reported sexual activites (no difference observed), work location (more non-self DNA for indoor workers) ; comparison: DNA from partner commonly detected only under fingernails or only in handprints, unknown donors were rarely detected on more than one location; most common shedder category: intermediate (approx. 2/3), weak positive correlation between DNA under fingernails and on gripped tubes, approx. 2/3 of participants were assigned the same category with both handgripping and fingernail swabbing shedder tests, weak positive correlation between cell number and DNA amounts but only 40% of participants were assigned the same category for cell counting and fingernail method,
Raised Questions
Reason for differences between hand holding and fingernail sampling experiment postulated: hygiene habits, nail-biting habits, scratching, hand washing; need for a standardized shedder test emphasized
Cautionary Remarks
N/A