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

Optical characterization of epidermal cells and their relationship to DNA recovery from touch samples.

F1000Research, 2015

Study Design

Addressed Question

investigation of the relative contribution of extracellular and intracellular DNA to touch DNA

Activity Context

None

Category

Primary Deposit

Specifications

Bodily OriginIndividual Characteristics

Variables of Interest

handwashing status

Stringency of Control

Controlled

Number of Individuals

8

Replicates per Individual and Condition

2

Nucleic Acid

DNA

Bodily Origin

skin (hands)

Depositor & Contact

Depositor Characteristics

N/A

Criteria for Shedder Status

N/A

Previous Activities

(handwashing)

Contact Scenario

(Handwashing -) Hand deposit - sampling

Primary Substrate

Primary Substrate Type

sterile conical plastic tube

Primary Substrate Material

Plastic

Deposit

holding 5 min

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 (Assumed)

Sampling Time

direct

Persistence

N/A

Sampling Method

double swabbing (wet +dry), elution into 1 mL water

Sampling Area

tube surface

Laboratory Analysis

Extraction

Isolation of extracellular and cell pellet DNA by centrifugation and Amicon filtration; phenol-chloroform extraction of pelleted cells

DNA Quantification

Investigator Quantiplex Human Kit, ABI Prism 7500 SDS

Input for Profiling

N/A

Profiling

N/A

Reference Samples

N/A

Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis

N/A

RNA Data Interpretation

N/A

Results

DNA Quantity

0-4.646 ng

Profile Quality

N/A

Parameter Used for Comparison

cell counts, DNA yield from cell pellet and eDNA fraction

Summary of Results

Flow cytometry characterization of touch samples: two distinct fractions (fully differentiated keratinocytes and cellular debris/fragments, no indication of buccal cells); high cell counts from all touch samples (washed hands > unwashed hands), but low amounts of DNA in cellular fraction (max. 0.22 ng); higher amounts of DNA recovered from eDNA fraction: unwashed hands (up to 4.646 ng) >> washed hands (max. 0.242 ng); no correlation between cell counts and the amount of eDNA; no correlation between quantity of DNA and dominant hand; total eDNA proportion: 84-100%

Raised Questions

presence of buccal cells (possibly deformed and thus indistinguishable from corneocytes) could be confirmed by the use of antibodies; manner of contact: does rubbing increase the amount of iDNA vs. eDNA (indications by preliminary experiments); identification of factors non-DNA factors for the identification of individuals via DNA-free skin cells

Cautionary Remarks

Can useful profiling results be obtained from eDNA (n.s.)? review already happened in 2015, only V1 published, questions from reviewers (can useful profiles be obtained?) not answered