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

DNA decontamination of fingerprint brushes.

Forensic Science International, 2017

Study Design

Addressed Question

Possibility of DNA transfer by fingerprint brushes and possible prevention by cleaning methods

Activity Context

Professional

Category

PersistenceTransfer Scenario

Specifications

Bodily OriginPersistence with DecontaminationTransfer via Vector

Variables of Interest

DNA Sourcefingerprinting brushusage scenariocleaning scenario

Stringency of Control

Controlled

Number of Individuals

3

Replicates per Individual and Condition

3-6

Nucleic Acid

DNA

Bodily Origin

salivaskin (hands)trace

Depositor & Contact

Depositor Characteristics

N/A

Criteria for Shedder Status

N/A

Previous Activities

new brush or brush used in crime scene situation

Contact Scenario

primary deposit of DNA on both surfaces - usage of brush on first surface - (cleaning scenario of brush) - usage on second surface - sampling

Primary Substrate

Primary Substrate Type

glass plates or glass jars

Primary Substrate Material

Glass

Deposit

1 ml of saliva, one handprint or multiple handprints (one/day)

Delay

N/A

Secondary Substrate

Secondary Substrate Type

fingerprint brush

Secondary Substrate Material

FibreglassSquirrel Hair

Secondary Substrate Contact

brushing primary surface 20x

Further Transfer

(cleaning with sodium hypochlorite or Virkon) - brushing secondary surface in the same manner

Sampling

Background DNA on Sampled Surface

Negative (Confirmed)

Sampling Time

direct

Persistence

N/A

Sampling Method

direct extraction from brush hairs/swabbing of brushed surfaces

Sampling Area

brush bristles, glass substrates: 14x22 cm^2

Laboratory Analysis

Extraction

DNA IQ (Promega), final volume: 50-60 µl

DNA Quantification

Quantifiler Trio

Input for Profiling

0.5 ng or 15 µl DNA template

Profiling

PowerPlex 21, 3500xL Genetic Analyzer, GeneMapper ID-X software v1.4, threshold: 175/2000 rfu

Reference Samples

taken from donors of biological samples

Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis

comparison to reference profiles where available, determination of average profile contribution of individual donors

RNA Data Interpretation

N/A

Results

DNA Quantity

N/A

Profile Quality

mostly full profiles from saliva donors

Parameter Used for Comparison

donor profiles completeness

Summary of Results

full profiles from saliva donors were detected from brush bristles (in 5% of cases, additional unknown alleles present); DNA was transferred via brushes from saliva stains to handprints (avg. Contribution 46%); Virkon (5%) and sodium hypochlorite treatment significantly reduces, but does not completely eliminate salivary DNA transfer to 1-3% with no significant difference between cleaning solutions; Minimal transfer of DNA was observed from brushes used on touchDNA (avg. below 1%); After the transfer scenario, brush bristles retained transferred DNA, which could be removed by cleaning method; Dusting primary surfaces with previously used brushes of unknown history resulted in the transfer of considerable amounts of DNA from unknown sources; DNA transfer via previously used brushes was higher from squirrel hair brushes than from fiber glass brushes; Brushes survive Virkon treatment for longer time with less damage; Conclusion: DNA transfer via fingerprint brushes is possible and dependent on the biological material, brushes used and the applied cleaning method

Raised Questions

N/A

Cautionary Remarks

proportion of brush bristles sampled n.s.; Many different factors varied, variation would not always have been necessary (i.e. testing of multiple, single hand and touch deposits not necessary for the informative value of the study) but rather reduces comprehensibility of study