DNA transfer within forensic exhibit packaging: Potential for DNA loss and relocation
FSI Genetics, 2012
Authors
Journal
FSI Genetics
Study Design
Addressed Question
DNA transfer within forensic exhibit packaging under controlled conditions
Activity Context
Category
Specifications
Variables of Interest
Stringency of Control
Number of Individuals
1
Replicates per Individual and Condition
4
Nucleic Acid
Bodily Origin
Depositor & Contact
Depositor Characteristics
N/A
Criteria for Shedder Status
N/A
Previous Activities
N/A
Contact Scenario
transfer of saliva on designated are of exhibit - drying time (24 h) - packaging - carrying - shaking on orbital mixer (1 h, 150 rpm) - transport -sampling
Primary Substrate
Primary Substrate Type
4x4 cm deposit area of cotton fabric or plastic
Primary Substrate Material
Deposit
5 or 50 µl saliva
Delay
N/A
Secondary Substrate
Secondary Substrate Type
mock exhibit or plastic exhibit bag
Secondary Substrate Material
Secondary Substrate Contact
pressure and friction 1h
Further Transfer
N/A
Sampling
Background DNA on Sampled Surface
Sampling Time
delayed (by contact scenario)
Persistence
packaging
Sampling Method
direct extraction from all surfaces
Sampling Area
7.5cmx4cm deposit squares, whole bag surface
Laboratory Analysis
Extraction
5% Chelex, Amicon Ultra YM-30 centrifugal filter (Millipore)
DNA Quantification
Quantifiler Human DNA Quantification kit (Applied biosystems), ABI PRISM 7500 SDS Instrument
Input for Profiling
N/A
Profiling
only for the replicate with the highest conc.: AmpFlSTR Profiler plus (Applied Biosystems)
Reference Samples
taken from depositor
Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis
confirmation of single source profile from saliva depositor
RNA Data Interpretation
N/A
Results
DNA Quantity
n.s. (only transfer rates in % calculated from conc. shown)
Profile Quality
single full or partial profile from depositor
Parameter Used for Comparison
% transfer = DNA on specific surface (ng)/(DNA on all surfaces (ng))
Summary of Results
DNA transfer from deposit area ranges from 0-100% (avg. 43.6%) to all areas of the exhibit packaging and the substrate; many variables influence DNA transfer but not under all conditions: highest transfer to secondary substrate from cotton deposit area, no apparent pattern as to where most DNA is transferred to when plastic primary substrate; loose bags increase transfer from cotton substrates; weight (68 g) does not influence transfer; for 50 µl deposits, significantly higher transfer with down placement of the bag; significantly higher transfer to primary and secondary substrate for 5µl compared to 50µl deposits on cotton
Raised Questions
possibility of a greater weight having more influence on transfer rates; is the loss of DNA during the extraction process uniform?
Cautionary Remarks
high variability between replicates (especially for plastic substrates); absolute amounts of DNA transferred/deposited not shown; simplified assumptions: extraction efficiencies equal from all substrates, transfer rates not dependent on variable initial deposit