Investigation of secondary DNA transfer of skin cells under controlled test conditions.
Legal Medicine, 2010
Authors
Journal
Legal Medicine
Study Design
Addressed Question
factors influencing DNA transfer rates in skin cell deposits
Activity Context
Category
Specifications
Variables of Interest
Stringency of Control
Number of Individuals
1
Replicates per Individual and Condition
6
Nucleic Acid
Bodily Origin
Depositor & Contact
Depositor Characteristics
good shedder
Criteria for Shedder Status
N/A
Previous Activities
N/A
Contact Scenario
primary deposit - (drying time) - grid stencil allowing specified contact between primary and secondary substrate
Primary Substrate
Primary Substrate Type
soft porous cotton, hard non-porous plastic
Primary Substrate Material
Deposit
rubbing 10-15s
Delay
N/A
Secondary Substrate
Secondary Substrate Type
soft porous cotton fabric, hard non-porous plastic
Secondary Substrate Material
Secondary Substrate Contact
passive 60s, pressure (1kg) 60s, friction pressure (1kg) 60s
Further Transfer
N/A
Sampling
Background DNA on Sampled Surface
Sampling Time
direct
Persistence
N/A
Sampling Method
direct processing of substrates
Sampling Area
6.5x4.5cm^2 deposit areas
Laboratory Analysis
Extraction
5% Chelex and Amicon Ultra (Millipore)
DNA Quantification
Quantifiler Human DNA Quantification kit, ABI PRISM 7500 SDS Instrument
Input for Profiling
N/A
Profiling
AmpFlSTR Profiler Plus, ABI PRISM 3100 Genetic Analyzer, GeneMapper ID software (Applied Biosystems)
Reference Samples
taken from depositor
Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis
genotyping samples with the largest amount of DNA from each combination of variables to confirm absence of contamination
RNA Data Interpretation
N/A
Results
DNA Quantity
initial deposit: 11.68/6.12 ng on cotton and 0.396/0.482 ng on plastic (fresh/dried)
Profile Quality
Full profiles from depositor, no contaminating DNA (degradation n.a. in every case)
Parameter Used for Comparison
% transfer = DNA transferred (ng)/(DNA on primary substrate + DNA transferred (ng))
Summary of Results
initial deposit varies strongly, transfer rate are not significantly dependent on initial deposit (insignificant difference in transfer rate between largest and smallest deposits within each set of replicates); primary deposit is higher on porous substrates; plastic as primary and cotton as secondary substrates increase transfer; transfer rates approx. double from passive to pressure to friction contact; freshness of deposit does not significantly influence transfer rate; skin cells behave significantly different than other biological substrates (Goray et al (2010)): higher transfer rate from cotton, lower transfer rate from plastic;
Raised Questions
assessment of real amount of deposited DNA? Reason for large deviations in transfer rates (composition of deposit, variations in the extraction/concentration process)?
Cautionary Remarks
variable extraction efficiencies between substrates not taken into consideration