Detectability of bloodstains after machine washing
International Journal of Legal Medicine, 2019
Authors
- MHMichaela Hofmann
- MSMartin M. Schulz
- JAJiri Adamec
- OPOliver Peschel
- KAKatja Anslinger
- BBBirgit Bayer
- GBGraw, B.
Journal
International Journal of Legal Medicine
Study Design
Addressed Question
influence of different washing conditions on the detectability of bloodstains on fabric cloths
Activity Context
Category
Specifications
Variables of Interest
Stringency of Control
Number of Individuals
2
Replicates per Individual and Condition
1
Nucleic Acid
Bodily Origin
Depositor & Contact
Depositor Characteristics
one male, one female
Criteria for Shedder Status
N/A
Previous Activities
N/A
Contact Scenario
blood stain deposit - (drying) - pre-washing step - washing step - drying for min. 24 h - Luminol staining - (sampling for DNA analysis)
Primary Substrate
Primary Substrate Type
10x10 cm black and white cotton and polyester textiles
Primary Substrate Material
Deposit
2-5 drops freshly drawn blood without anticoagulants (each ~50 µl) dropped onto fabric from 50cm height
Delay
drying blood for 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 days
Secondary Substrate
Secondary Substrate Type
control patches from the same fabric type cowashed with primary substrates
Secondary Substrate Material
Secondary Substrate Contact
co-washing under the same washing conditions
Further Transfer
N/A
Sampling
Background DNA on Sampled Surface
N/A
Sampling Time
delayed
Persistence
various pre-washing conditions, washing treatments: Pre-washing treatments: A: none, B: soaking in cold water for 30 min, C: soaking in aspirin solution for 30 min, D: treating with stain remover for 10 min; various drying conditions prior to washing: room temperature or 40°C climate chamber, drying times from 0 to 7 days; various washing conditions: washing machines (Miele Softtronic W3241 or Miele Novotronic W872), washing detergents (MAXITRAT universal laundry powder or Ariel Actilift liquid laundry detergent), washing temperature (30°C, 60°C, 95°C) and filling degrees of washing machine; combination of conditions per experiment represented in Table 2
Sampling Method
Areas with strongest luminescence (Luminol) were cut out and dried prior to direct extraction
Sampling Area
average size. 4cm^2
Laboratory Analysis
Extraction
Maxwell 16 LEV blood DNA kit
DNA Quantification
Quantifiler Trio DNA Quantification kit
Input for Profiling
N/A
Profiling
PowerPlex ESX 17 fast System, 3500xl genetic analyzer, GeneMapper ID-X 1.4 software
Reference Samples
obtained from all blood donors
Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis
classification of profiles: 1: no usable profiles obtained, 2: 1 person profile, matching volunteer, 3: mixed stain, max. of 2 volunteer alleles missing, 4: mixed stain, attribution to specific person not possible, 5: mixed stain, max. of 2 experimenter alleles missing
RNA Data Interpretation
N/A
Results
DNA Quantity
N/A
Profile Quality
majority of samples showed insufficient DNA for STR typing or unusable profiles, 40% of samples showed the blood donor as DNA contributor (single source or contributor to mixture)
Parameter Used for Comparison
Luminol reaction, Combur test, STR profile category (1: no usable profiles obtained, 2: 1 person profile, matching volunteer, 3: mixed stain, max. of 2 volunteer alleles missing, 4: mixed stain, attribution to specific person not possible, 5: mixed stain, max. of 2 experimenter alleles missing)
Summary of Results
bloodstain detectability (luminol testing), showed hardly any difference between textiles washed at 30°C or 60°C but decreased markedly for stains washed at 95°C; little differences were observed between groups of different pretreatment and no pretreatment succeeded in completely preventing blood stain detection; in all trials, blood detectability was higher or at least as high on white compared to black cloths; transmission of blood was observed in the washing process, as control cloths showed almost as strong a luminol reaction (and positive Combur test results) as previously stained cloths; completely loading the washing machine lead to an increased detection of traces on primary substrates and reduced detection on control cloths; the new washing machine model yielded better blood removal results than the older model, but a clear pattern regarding washing detergents was not observed; visibility of primary traces increased for samples dried at 40°C compared to room temperature; increased luminescence scores for samples dried at least 2 days; subset of samples (white cotton and polyester fabric, washed with a universal laundry detergent at 30°C in a Miele Novotronic W872 and dried for 0 to 7 days prior to washing) sent for DNA analysis: out of 72 samples (48 samples, 24 control patches), 18 (10,8) did not yield enough DNA for STR typing (<0.5 pg/µl), 7 (6,1) gave a single source profile from the volunteer (class 2), 12 (12,0) gave a mixtures with the volunteer included (class 3), 20 (13,7) showed no usable profile (class 1), 7 (4,3) showed an uninterpretable mixed stain (class 4) and 8 (3,5) showed a mixture with a maximum of two experimenter alleles missing (class 5); higher STR typing success from cotton compared to polyester samples; higher STR typing success from samples dried for at least 48 h; Luminol scoring was not predictive of STR typing success; secondary transfer and post-laundry contamination observed, however, STR typing was more successful on primary substrates compared to control cloths
Raised Questions
reason for "inverse luminol reaction" observed on some of the black polyester samples
Cautionary Remarks
for most experiments, washing machine types were randomly assigned to the samples which might have impacted some results; additional alleles observed in STR profiles attributed to "post-laundry" contamination, however, pre-laundry contamination controls are missing, thus it is not possible to determine the degree of contamination prior to the experiment; DNA yields and a possible correlation to luminol intensity n.s.