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

Optimizing Collection of Trace Biological Samples from Vehicle Headrests

Themis: Research Journal of Justice Studies and Forensic Science, 2017

Study Design

Addressed Question

Comparison of tape-lifting and double-swabbing as recovery methods for trace DNA from different vehicle headrest materials

Activity Context

Theft

Category

PersistenceRecovery

Specifications

Persistence with TimeSamplingSurface

Variables of Interest

Sampling Methodsurface materialinitial deposit volumestorage time

Stringency of Control

Controlled

Number of Individuals

1 (?)

Replicates per Individual and Condition

2 (?)

Nucleic Acid

DNA

Bodily Origin

saliva

Depositor & Contact

Depositor Characteristics

N/A

Criteria for Shedder Status

N/A

Previous Activities

N/A

Contact Scenario

saliva deposit on surface - storage for 1-3 days - sampling

Primary Substrate

Primary Substrate Type

vehicle seat fabrics (cloth, leather, vinyl)

Primary Substrate Material

FabricLeatherVinyl

Deposit

5 or 10 µl of saliva

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

Present

Sampling Time

delayed

Persistence

time: 1, 2 or 3 days storage at room temperature

Sampling Method

double swabbing (Puritan Sterile Cotton tipped applicator swabs, moistening agent n.s.), tape-lifting (SceneSafe Touch DNA FAST tape lifts)

Sampling Area

25x75cm pieces of fabric, sampling area n.s.

Laboratory Analysis

Extraction

proteinase K digestion, phenol-chloroform extraction, Microcon concentration (final volume: 20 µl)

DNA Quantification

Quantifiler Duo Human DNA quantification kit

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

0-43.5 ng for swabbed and 2.3-41.8 ng for tape-lifted samples

Profile Quality

N/A

Parameter Used for Comparison

DNA yield (ng)

Summary of Results

Tape-lifts mostly outperform swabs on cloth and vinyl substrates; swabs were equally or more effective on leather substrates; highest total recovery from leather substrates in comparison to cloth and vinyl substrates; exposure time did not affect sample recovery for tape-lifts or swabs

Raised Questions

further testing is needed to understand how textures and characteristics of surfaces affect DNA recovery

Cautionary Remarks

background DNA on fabrics not taken into consideration; details on sample deposition missing (number of saliva depositors, number of deposits, deposits taken from one or several saliva samples?, number of replicates); no statistical analysis of results; incomplete sampling of Day 1 substrates (5 µl deposits on cloths + sampling by swabbing missing)