Recovery of environmental human DNA by insects.

We tested the hypotheses that foraging insects can acquire human DNA from the environment and that insect-delivered human DNA is of sufficient quantity and quality to permit standard forensic analyses. Houseflies, German cockroaches, and camel crickets were exposed to dusty surfaces and then assayed for human mitochondrial and nuclear loci by conventional and qPCR, and multiplex STR amplification. Over two experiments, 100% of insect groups and 94% of dust controls tested positive for human DNA. Of 177 individuals, 33-67% tested positive and 13 yielded quantifiable human DNA (mean = 0.022 ± 0.006 ng; mean dust control = 2.448 ± 0.960 ng); four had at least one positive allele call for one or more locus; eight others showed multiple peaks at some loci. Results imply that application to routine forensic casework is limited given current detection methodology yet demonstrate the potential use of insects as environmental samplers for human DNA.

Characterization of human DNA in environmental samples.

Environmental samples from indoor surfaces can be confounded by dust, which is composed largely of human skin cells and has been documented to contain roughly tens of micrograms of total DNA per gram of dust. This study complements previous published work by providing estimates of the quantity of amplifiable human DNA found in environmental samples from a typical indoor environment, categorized by the intensity of human traffic and visible quantity of dust. Dust was collected by surface swabbing standard 576 cm(2) areas in eight locations, and evaluated for total DNA quantity, presence of human DNA (mitochondrial and nuclear loci using conventional PCR), quantity of human nuclear DNA using quantitative PCR, and STR analysis. The total DNA content of 36 dust samples ranged from 9 to 28 ng/cm(2), and contained 0.2-1.1 pg/cm(2) of human DNA. Overall, human DNA was detected in 97% of 36 dust samples and 61% of samples yielded allele distributions of varying degrees of complexity when subjected to STR analysis. The implications of this study are twofold. First, the presence of dust in evidence can be a significant contamination source in forensic investigations because the human DNA component is of sufficient quality and quantity to produce allele calls in STR analysis. This can be effectively managed by implementing stringent protocols for collection and analysis of potential biological samples. A second implication is the use of dust as a source of evidence for identification of inhabitants within a defined location. In the latter case, a number of additional studies would be necessary to identify relevant pretreatments for environmental dust samples and to develop the necessary deconvolution techniques to separate the composite genotypes obtained.