Investigative Studies into the Recovery of DNA from Improvised Explosive Device Containers
Journal of Forensic Sciences, 2012
Authors
Journal
Journal of Forensic Sciences
Study Design
Addressed Question
possibilities of post-deflagration DNA recovery from backpacks containing improvised explosive devices using a consensus profiling approach
Activity Context
Category
Specifications
Variables of Interest
Stringency of Control
Number of Individuals
9
Replicates per Individual and Condition
1
Nucleic Acid
Bodily Origin
Depositor & Contact
Depositor Characteristics
N/A
Criteria for Shedder Status
N/A
Previous Activities
N/A
Contact Scenario
using and wearing backpack for approx. 11 days - transport to smoke room - deflagration - transporting fragments back to laboratory - sampling
Primary Substrate
Primary Substrate Type
600D polyester fabric backpacks
Primary Substrate Material
Deposit
wearing/using approx. 11 days
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
Sampling Time
delayed
Persistence
pipe bomb deflagration, packaging and transport back to laboratory
Sampling Method
double swabbing: sterile cotton swabs moistened with 150 µl digestion buffer
Sampling Area
target areas: 5 zippers, top handle, front tab, front middle region, left strap, right strap, neck region
Laboratory Analysis
Extraction
proteolytic digestion, phenol chloroform extraction, Microcon YM-30 spin column, final volume: 20 µl
DNA Quantification
Quantifiler Human DNA Quantification kit
Input for Profiling
4 µl DNA template in 10 µl reaction volume
Profiling
AmpFlSTR MiniFiler PCR amplification kit, ABI Prism 310 Genetic Analyzer, GeneMapper ID softwarev3.2.1, threshold: 50 rfu
Reference Samples
taken from all volunteers
Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis
development of a consensus profile from all samples from one backpack, subsequent comparison to reference profiles by second investigator
RNA Data Interpretation
N/A
Results
DNA Quantity
0-16.1 ng, large variability between users and sampling sites
Profile Quality
mostly full handlers profiles, several occasions of drop-in, drop-out, peak height imbalances and mixtures
Parameter Used for Comparison
number of loci according to 6 categories (only handler alleles, handler as major contributor, handler included, only one handler allele included, non of the alleles matches handler, no alleles called), number of loci within in the first three categories, DNA yield (ng/µl)
Summary of Results
in several occasions, some sampling sites were destroyed in the deflagration process; large variability in profiling results with the handler detected in 88.7 % (category 1-3) cases, but only in half of these as a single contributor; recoverability of DNA differed from backpack regions with the top handle being the most effective sampling area; large variability between handlers with some handlers producing mostly full profiles and some mostly partial; highest quantification rates from top handle, straps and neck region; the consensus profile approach from all regions of one backpack resulted in the generation of the correct handler profile in 7/8 cases, with one missing allele in the eight sample
Raised Questions
N/A
Cautionary Remarks
no steadfast criteria used or given for the generation of consensus profiles (preliminary nature of approach); no details on backpack handling scenario given; positive control handled by a different individual and in a different manner than deflagrated samples