STR genotyping and mtDNA sequencing of latent fingerprint on paper
Forensic Science International, 2003
Authors
Journal
Forensic Science International
Study Design
Addressed Question
characteristics of DNA deposit on paper
Activity Context
Category
Specifications
Variables of Interest
Stringency of Control
Number of Individuals
4
Replicates per Individual and Condition
1-4
Nucleic Acid
Bodily Origin
Depositor & Contact
Depositor Characteristics
2 males, 2 females
Criteria for Shedder Status
N/A
Previous Activities
handwashing in the morning, normal activities or after sports
Contact Scenario
handwashing in the morning (not directly before touching) - (sports) - touch of paper - sampling
Primary Substrate
Primary Substrate Type
5x2cm paper sections
Primary Substrate Material
Deposit
touch (pressure as if turning a page), 1-60s
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
direct
Persistence
N/A
Sampling Method
direct extraction from paper, cotton wool swabbing (no destruction of the paper)
Sampling Area
5x2 cm sections of paper
Laboratory Analysis
Extraction
InViSorb Forensic Kit
DNA Quantification
N/A
Input for Profiling
set volume: 3 µl
Profiling
AmpFlSTR Profiler Plus PCR amplification kit 38 cycles (LCN), ABI Prism 310 Genetic Analyzer, GeneScan 3.1, Sequencing Analysis 3.0; mtDNA: mtDNA HV-1 amplification; Threshold: 5% of most prominent peak
Reference Samples
buccal swabs taken from all donors
Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis
calling alleles with >5% of the peak height of the most prominent allele at a given locus; determination of % of alleles typed correctly and additional "false" alleles
RNA Data Interpretation
N/A
Results
DNA Quantity
N/A
Profile Quality
mostly full profiles with slightly higher dropout at larger loci
Parameter Used for Comparison
proportion of expected alleles successfully amplified (whole profiles or per locus)
Summary of Results
both sampling methods showed comparable profile completeness, swabbed pieces of paper still yield DNA with direct extraction from paper, thus swabbing is not 100% efficient; profile completeness is not dependent on touching time, time of the day, previous handwashing or previous sports activities; no significant difference between donors; mtDNA sequencing was successful in all cases, even when only partial or no STR profiles were obtained
Raised Questions
N/A
Cautionary Remarks
DNA not quantified; as almost all profiles were complete, experimental conditions might have altered DNA quantity but did not influence profile completeness