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

Factors affecting DNA recovery from cartridge cases

Forensic science international. Genetics, 2020

Study Design

Addressed Question

investigation of factors affecting DNA recovery from cartridge cases, specifically looking at the type of ammunition and firearms

Activity Context

Shooting

Category

RecoveryTransfer Scenario

Specifications

ContactExtractionSamplingSurface

Variables of Interest

size and material of cartridge casetype of firearmSwab Typelysis conditions

Stringency of Control

Controlled

Number of Individuals

4

Replicates per Individual and Condition

5

Nucleic Acid

DNA

Bodily Origin

salivaskin (hands)

Depositor & Contact

Depositor Characteristics

saliva donor: male; handling of cartridges: 12 male, 8 female; assessing difference of cartridge type: 1 female, good shedder

Criteria for Shedder Status

no criteria provided

Previous Activities

hands washed 1 hour prior deposition, "normal activities" (not specified) until deposition

Contact Scenario

Cartridges were loaded into the firearm’s magazine, mimicking real-world scenarios

Primary Substrate

Primary Substrate Type

11 different cartridge cases

Primary Substrate Material

BrassMetalPlasticSteel

Deposit

saliva: smearing 1-5µl on m/39B cartridges; handling cartridges for 1 min with both hand and loading into magazine; handling cartridges for 1 min without loading

Delay

sampling within 24 hours after deposition

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

Present

Sampling Time

swabbing about 45 s

Persistence

n.s.

Sampling Method

protocol optimisation: Selefa cotton swab, foam VWR critical swab, 4N6FLOQ Swab wetted with 30-60µl SDS, tween 20 TritonX-100 added to 0.9%NaCl. Additionally: cotton swab was heavily wetted with 0.9% NaCl and used to swab the cartridge case surface. A second dry cotton swab was then applied to absorb residual buffer. The outermost cotton layer of both swabs was cut and processed for DNA extraction. optimised protocol: 4N6FLOQ Swab wetted with ~30 μL 0.9% NaCl the entire surface of the cartridge case with medium to hard pressure.

Sampling Area

entire cartridge case

Laboratory Analysis

Extraction

original protocol: addition of 1 mL lysis buffer (5% Chelex100 Resin, 0.2% Tween20, and 0.1 mg/mL proteinase K), series of vortexing and incubation steps: Incubation at RT for 30 min, vortex, 56 °C 45-75 minutes, vortex, 100 °C 20-40 min. Centrifucgation at 11,000rcf, transfer liquid to Amicon Ultra 2 mL filter, centrifugation until eluate is reduced to ≤ 50 μL. optimised protocol: addition of 0.5 ml lysis buffer, no incubation at RT, incubation at 56°C, 1500rpm, 1h, vortex, 100 °C 20-40 min. Centrifucgation at 11,000rcf, transfer liquid to Amicon Ultra 2 mL filter, centrifugation until eluate is reduced to ≤ 50 μL

DNA Quantification

Quantifiler HP DNA Quantification kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific) for casework samples until May 13th, 2019, after which the PowerQuant kit (Promega Corporation) was applied. Both kits were used with an Applied Biosystems 7500 Real-Time PCR System

Input for Profiling

17.5µl extract, for concentrations > 0.08 ng/μL (equivalent to 1.4 ng DNA in PCR ) extracts were diluted

Profiling

PowerPlex ESX 16 Fast System (Promega Corporation), ABI 3500 Genetic Analyzer (Thermo Fisher Scientific) with the following specifications: Capillary array: 36 cm, Polymer: POP4, Injection parameters: 13 seconds at 1.2 kV

Reference Samples

n.s. but assumed taken from handlers

Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis

allele peak height thresholds (30–75 rfu depending on fluorescence channel) to determine valid alleles. Profiles were evaluated for total sum of allele peak heights (TPH) and number of successfully typed loci (≥13 STR markers required for approval); profiles categorised in N/A (no profile obtained), Weak (only few alleles detected), complex mixture (not usable), approved (single donor or clear major, possible to use for comparisons including database searching)

RNA Data Interpretation

N/A

Results

DNA Quantity

Range: <0.001 ng/μL to 0.069 ng/μL (highest individual shedder); Average: mean values varied by material and shedder status, with brass cartridges typically yielding 0.002–0.039 ng/μL and plastic cartridges ~0.032 ng/μL.

Profile Quality

profiles categorised in N/A (no profile obtained: cartridge cases, cotton swab: 88.9%, cartridge cases, flocked swab: 71.4%; cartridge, cotton swab: 84.0%; cartridge, flocked swab: 56.7%), Weak (only few alleles detected: cartridge cases, cotton swab: 2.3%, cartridge cases, flocked swab: 8.1%; cartridge, cotton swab: 2.6%; cartridge, flocked swab: 12.9%); complex mixture (not usable: cartridge cases, cotton swab: 3.8%, cartridge cases, flocked swab: 12.5%; cartridge, cotton swab: 5.6%; cartridge, flocked swab: 21.9%); approved (single donor or clear major, possible to use for comparisons including database searching: cartridge cases, cotton swab: 5.0%, cartridge cases, flocked swab: 8.0%; cartridge, cotton swab: 7.8%; cartridge, flocked swab: 8.5%)

Parameter Used for Comparison

TPH (total sum of allele peak heights), no. Of alleles, quantities

Summary of Results

Improved DNA Recovery with Nylon-Flocked Swabs (0.003 ± 0.002 ng/μL from brass cartridges vs. 0.0002 ± 0.0006 ng/μL for cotton swabs); DNA yield varied widely among 20 volunteers: males shed more DNA (0.021 ± 0.027 ng/μL) than females (0.006 ± 0.008 ng/μL); Material and Firearm Influence: Brass cartridges (m/39B) yielded the highest DNA concentrations ( 0.039 ± 0.022 ng/μL ), followed by plastic cartridges (0.032 ± 0.014 ng/μL), Stainless steel and coated cartridges performed poorly (e.g., 0.003 ± 0.003 ng/μL for stainless steel); Limited Usable STR Profiles: Despite higher DNA yields, only 8.0% of cartridge cases and 8.5% of cartridges with nylon-flocked swabs generated approved STR profiles (single donor or clear major contributor). Complex mixtures remained common (12.5–21.9%); Controlled vs. Casework Samples: Controlled studies (ideal handling conditions) showed higher DNA yields, but casework samples often fell below the processing threshold ( 71.4–84.0% <0.001 ng/μL); Protocol optimization (e.g., detergents in buffer) improved recovery but did not resolve challenges with low-template or mixed DNA; Reproducibility: No significant differences in DNA recovery between four trained samplers using nylon-flocked swabs.

Raised Questions

need to study how environmental factors (e.g., humidity, rain, oxidation) affect DNA degradation on cartridge cases, Oxidation processes on cartridge surfaces, further investigation into the consistency of shedder status across individuals and contexts is needed. The study notes that DNA yield varies not only between individuals (e.g., males vs. females) but also within the same individual on different occasions, high prevalence of complex mixtures in STR profiles (12.5–21.9%) underscores the need for better methods to interpret low-template or mixed DNA samples, further research into optimal sampling windows and storage conditions to mitigate DNA loss over time needed

Cautionary Remarks

exact elution volume not given and only concentrations given. Also no information if dilution was accounted for when reporting on concentration