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

Evaluation of tapelifting as a collection method for touch DNA.

FSI Genetics, 2014

Study Design

Addressed Question

evaluation of the efficiency of different sampling methods for touch DNA

Activity Context

None

Category

Primary DepositRecovery

Specifications

SamplingSurface

Variables of Interest

Sampling Methodsubstrate that is sampled from

Stringency of Control

Controlled

Number of Individuals

1

Replicates per Individual and Condition

8-28

Nucleic Acid

DNA

Bodily Origin

skin (hands)

Depositor & Contact

Depositor Characteristics

one good shedder

Criteria for Shedder Status

N/A

Previous Activities

N/A

Contact Scenario

deposition of DNA on primary substrate - sampling

Primary Substrate

Primary Substrate Type

four fabric types: poly/cotton, cotton flannelette, drill-woven cotton, polyester strapping; 250x150mm pieces

Primary Substrate Material

CottonFabricPolyester

Deposit

rubbing over material with whole hand

Delay

N/A

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

Negative (Confirmed)

Sampling Time

direct

Persistence

N/A

Sampling Method

tapelifting by Scenesafe FAST minitapes or Scotch 810 Magic tapes (1,2,4,8,16,32 or 64 times) or swabbing (wet+dry) as well as direct extraction from material after first sampling

Sampling Area

sampling of 25x38mm area

Laboratory Analysis

Extraction

DNA IQ on Biomek NXp liquid handling platforms

DNA Quantification

Quantifiler (Life Technologies)

Input for Profiling

0.5 ng or max. of 15µl template DNA

Profiling

PowerPlex 21 system, ABI Prism 3500 Genetic analyzer, GeneMapper ID-X, threshold: 50rfu

Reference Samples

taken from donor

Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis

comparison to donor's reference profile, contribution from unknown sources deemed insignificant

RNA Data Interpretation

N/A

Results

DNA Quantity

N/A

Profile Quality

partial to complete profiles depending on sampling method, mainly random dropout due to low template quantity and not degradation

Parameter Used for Comparison

mean % recovery (=amount of DNA from tape or swab/(DNA from tape or swab + DNA from direct extraction), donor allele counts

Summary of Results

Scenesafe FAST tapes performed significantly better in most experiments or equally good compared to Scotch Magic tapes and cotton swabs: higher mean % recovery, higher donor allele counts; Mean % recovery increased with the number of tapings and then decreased after a certain threshold point (8 tapings for Scotch Magic tape, 32 tapings for Scenesafe FAST); median number of alleles recovered mostly not dependent on number of tapings; Scenesafe FAST taping is more efficient (higher mean % recovery and higher donor allele counts) from cotton and cotton/flannelette but not from strapping and flannelette; mean % recovery varied between 10-60%; DNA recovery efficiency from different substrate types: polyester strapping <cotton, polyester/cotton, polyester/cotton <flannelette

Raised Questions

suggestions of double sampling: tapelifting for surface DNA recently left and direct extraction, swabbing or vacuum methods for background DNA; effect of the sampled area? Variation among results by different samplers? Analyze variables affecting the deposit of touch DNA (pressure, duration of deposit, deposit area)? effects of taping glue on extraction? comparison of taping and swabbing for other substrates;

Cautionary Remarks

absolute quantification results n.s. (only from substrates after swabbing/taping); direct extraction from fabric not 100% efficient and possibly fabric-type specific; number and dependency/independency of replicates not entirely clear from method section