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

Trace DNA collection—Performance of minitape and three different swabs

FSI Genetics Supplement Series, 2009

Study Design

Addressed Question

comparison of different sampling methods

Activity Context

None

Category

Primary DepositRecovery

Specifications

ExtractionSamplingSurface

Variables of Interest

Sampling Methodsampled surface

Stringency of Control

Controlled

Number of Individuals

3

Replicates per Individual and Condition

2

Nucleic Acid

DNA

Bodily Origin

skin (neck)

Depositor & Contact

Depositor Characteristics

N/A

Criteria for Shedder Status

N/A

Previous Activities

N/A

Contact Scenario

primary deposit - sampling

Primary Substrate

Primary Substrate Type

fabric: t-shirt; tools: handles of screwdrivers

Primary Substrate Material

CottonPlastic

Deposit

wearing 3h, handling 10 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

N/A

Sampling Time

direct

Persistence

N/A

Sampling Method

cotton Dry swab, 4N6 DNA Flocked swab, self-saturating swab, Scenesafe FAST minitape, homemade water soluble mini-tapes

Sampling Area

inside neck area or whole screwdriver surface

Laboratory Analysis

Extraction

Chelex extraction or magnetic bead-based Biorobot EZ1

DNA Quantification

Quantifiler Human kit

Input for Profiling

set volume: 20/200 µl extract

Profiling

SGM Plus kit 28 cycles, ABI Prism 3130xl Genetic Analyzer, GeneMapperID v3.2, threshold: 50 rfu

Reference Samples

taken from depositors

Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis

determination of donor profiles completeness

RNA Data Interpretation

N/A

Results

DNA Quantity

2-80 ng from T-shirts, n.s. for plastic surfaces

Profile Quality

mostly partial up to full profiles

Parameter Used for Comparison

DNA yield (ng/µl), DNA profile completeness (full, partial), presence of inhibitors

Summary of Results

sampling: for absorbent surfaces, minitapes consistently showed higher DNA concentration and gave full profiles, no significant differences between different swabs, non-absorbent surfaces, minitapes and self-saturating swabs most efficient, self made minitapes resulted in unpipettable extracts and were thus discarded; extraction: EZ1 seemed to produce lower DNA concentrations with higher DNA purity (less inhibition) than Chelex

Raised Questions

analysis of additional samples in order to perform statistical comparison, development of routine methods for minitapes

Cautionary Remarks

details on experimental setup missing (e.g. sample size for screw drivers); no statistical analysis performed; most data not shown