Trace DNA Transfer in Co-Working Spaces: The Importance of Background DNA Analysis.

The presence of background DNA (bgDNA) can hinder the evaluation of DNA evidence at the activity level, especially when the suspect is expected to be retrieved due to their habitual occupation of the investigated environment. Based on real-life casework circumstances, this study investigates the prevalence, composition, origin, and probable transfer routes of bgDNA found on personal items in situations where their owner and person of interest (POI) share the same workspace. Baseline values of bgDNA were evaluated on the participants' personal items. Secondary and higher degree transfer scenarios of non-self DNA deposition were also investigated. The DNA from co-workers and co-inhabiting partners can be recovered from an individual's personal belongings. Non-self DNA present on the hands and deposited on a sterile surface can generate uninformative profiles. The accumulation of foreign DNA on surfaces over time appears to be crucial for the recovery of comparable profiles, resulting in detectable further transfer onto other surfaces. For a thorough evaluation of touch DNA traces at the activity level, it is necessary to collect information not only about DNA transfer probabilities but also about the presence of the POI as part of the 'baseline' bgDNA of the substrates involved.

The Latest Research Progress on Cell-Free DNA and Prospects of Its Forensic Application.

In recent years, with the continuous progress of DNA extraction and detection technology, cell-free DNA(cfDNA)has been widely used in the life science field, and its potential application value in forensic identification is becoming more and more obvious. This paper reviews the concept, formation mechanism, and classification of cfDNA, etc., and describes the latest research progress of cfDNA in personal identification of crime scene touch DNA samples and non-invasive prenatal paternity testing (NIPPT). Meanwhile, this paper summarizes the potential application of cfDNA in injury inference, and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of common cfDNA analysis methods and techniques, and its application prospects, to provide a new idea for the wide application of cfDNA in the field of forensic science.

Impact on touch DNA of an alcohol-based hand sanitizer used in COVID-19 prevention.

In the last years, forensic research has been focused on touch DNA in order to improve its evidential value in criminal activity investigations as well as to understand the variables impacting touch DNA. One of the emerging variables is represented by the use of alcohol-based sanitizers, which was suggested for hand hygiene during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aims of the present study were to assess the effect of a hand sanitizer on touch DNA deposition, transfer, and recovery and also to evaluate STR typing success, quality of DNA profiles, and personal identification. Before and after the use of an alcohol-based hand sanitizer, 20 volunteers deposited on glass surfaces 120 fingerprints, containing skin-derived or salivary DNA. Samples were quantified by real-time quantitative PCR (q-PCR), and 76 samples yielding > 15 pg/µl were typed for 21 autosomal STRs by GlobalFiler® PCR Amplification Kit. DNA profiles were classified into single source, mixed, and inconclusive profiles, and a LR assessment was performed by comparison to the reference samples using LRmix Studio software. After the use of hand sanitizer, samples yielded lower quantities of recovered transferred DNA, especially considering samples containing salivary DNA (p < 0.05 by Friedman test). All the 76 amplified samples (63.3% of the total) showed at least 10 typed loci, and 83-100% of profiles were consistent with the reference ones on the basis of a LR value ≥ 106. Results showed that, although the hand sanitizer reduces the DNA recovering, touch DNA samples might still be useful for forensic personal identification even when hand sanitizers are used.

Collection techniques of touch DNA deposited on human skin following a strangulation scenario.

Trace DNA is a significant type of evidence for its ability to be collected from touched items or surfaces at crime scenes to link suspects to their crimes. In cases of violent crimes like assault, sexual offences, or even homicide, often touch DNA is collected from the victim's skin. However, the collection of touch DNA from the victim's skin can be complex because of the mixture of DNA present, as there is likely to be a small quantity of the offender's DNA compared to the victim's DNA. Validating different collection methods or techniques can improve touch DNA sampling; therefore, this study investigated three collection techniques involving cotton and nylon swabs to test their efficiency for the collection of touch DNA from the human neck. There was a significant difference between the three recovery techniques used to recover touch DNA with a cotton swab (CS) (p < 0.05) and nylon swab (NS) (p < 0.05), with more alleles observed when the neck skin was moistened with 100 µL of distilled water using a spray bottle before collection with both swabs.

Who touched the document?: A new overall strategy for collection and identification of DNA from the questioned documents as a supportive evidence.

The questions on which judges/prosecutors apply for expertise are mostly about by whom a document was drafted/signed. In this study, a new collective strategy was constructed including a collection method, a modified-silica-based DNA isolation method, and a novel purification method on four contact traces formed on four different paper surface during writing, using PCR with AmpFlSTR®GlobalFiler™ STR kit (after experimental comparison between three different kits) and identification using CE. This collective analysis approach is more sensitive and superior to its equivalents on questioned documents in literature because quantifiable amounts of touch DNA and profiles with high loci percentages (100% on day 1, 72.72% after 1 week) were obtained up to 1 week even after the most challenging conditions of sample forming that a forensic scientist can meet; as washing hands just before drafting and using a very low pressure in a shorter time (simulating a simple contact real conditions while drafting), using no visualizing technique that damages the document. Using the strategy, four most commonly used paper types were compared, to see in which of them DNA could be recovered better. The success of this strategy was shown on the 1-day to 10-year-old real samples from a diary and some archive documents from a law office (including the mix-DNA and different ballpoint pens). Thus, it became possible to show if a person had touched the document, in high success rates up to 1 week as a secondary evidence, when primary evidences are insufficient for the detection of document fraud offenses.

Touch DNA Sampling Methods: Efficacy Evaluation and Systematic Review.

Collection and interpretation of "touch DNA" from crime scenes represent crucial steps during criminal investigations, with clear consequences in courtrooms. Although the main aspects of this type of evidence have been extensively studied, some controversial issues remain. For instance, there is no conclusive evidence indicating which sampling method results in the highest rate of biological material recovery. Thus, this study aimed to describe the actual considerations on touch DNA and to compare three different sampling procedures, which were "single-swab", "double-swab", and "other methods" (i.e., cutting out, adhesive tape, FTA® paper scraping), based on the experimental results published in the recent literature. The data analysis performed shows the higher efficiency of the single-swab method in DNA recovery in a wide variety of experimental settings. On the contrary, the double-swab technique and other methods do not seem to improve recovery rates. Despite the apparent discrepancy with previous research, these results underline certain limitations inherent to the sampling procedures investigated. The application of this information to forensic investigations and laboratories could improve operative standard procedures and enhance this almost fundamental investigative tool's probative value.

Accumulation of endogenous and exogenous nucleic acids in "Touch DNA" components on hands.

Successful forensic DNA profiling from handled items is increasingly routine in casework. This "touch DNA" is thought to contain both cellular and acellular nucleic acid sources. However, there is little clarity on the origins or characteristics of this material. The cellular component consists of anucleate, terminally differentiated corneocytes (assumed to lack DNA), and the occasional nucleated cell. The acellular DNA source is fragmentary, presumably cell breakdown products. This study examines the relative contributions each component makes to the hand-secretions (endogenous) and hand-accumulations (exogenous) by recovering rinses from the inside and outside of worn gloves. Additionally, cellular and acellular DNA was measured at timepoints up to 2 h after hand washing, both with and without interim contact. Microscopic examination confirmed cell morphology and presence of nucleic acids. Following the novel application of a hair keratinocyte lysis method and plasma-DNA fragment purification to hand rinse samples, DNA profiles were generated from both fractions. Exogenous cell-free DNA is shown to be a significant source of touch DNA, which reaccumulates quickly, although its amplifiable nuclear alleles are limited. Endogenous DNA is mostly cellular in origin and provides more allelic information consistently over time.

The recovery of touch DNA from RDX-C4 evidences.

RDX (Royal Demolition Explosive) is the organic compound with the formula (O2NNCH2)3. It is a white solid material without smell or taste, widely used as an explosive. It is more energetic explosive than TNT, and it was used widely in World War II. The estimated number of RDX-C4 cases in Bahrain ranged between the years 2015-2018 (May) with a total quantity of 370.72 KG in a total number of 38 cases. The effect of explosive RDX-C4 is very massive and can cause many causalities and fatalities among civilians and policemen. These cases consisted of adhesive film with tapes wrapped around RDX-C4 substance (Demolition Charge M112), black batteries, pipes, black bag contained RDX-C4, and in magnetic improvised explosive device (IED). Touch DNA recovery utilized different collection methods, such as nylon swabbing, tape lifting, and direct cutting of certain parts of the samples that were positive of RDX-C4 through DXR Raman Spectrometer. Samples were extracted and purified with magnetic beads chemistry and quantified. Low copy DNA extracts were subjected to a concentration step. DNA extracts were amplified and processed for detection to obtain reliable results using GlobalFiler Amplification PCR kit and run through ABI 3500xL Genetic Analyzer for fragment length determination. We have discovered that RDX-C4 cannot bind to the DNA nor to the solutions used in DNA typing. Thus, it does not cause DNA inhibition or degradation. From this point of view, we were successful in obtaining acceptable and fit results using advanced techniques. This study will be very useful and informative to assist the forensic community in terrorism case applications worldwide as terrorists do not respect geographical boundaries nor ethnicities of the victims, and the use of DNA profiling technology is the most suitable way to identify the terrorists and keep an end to their violence.

Comparison of Isohelix™ and Rayon swabbing systems for touch DNA recovery from metal surfaces.

A previous study evaluating two swabbing systems found that DNA was best recovered from sterile metal substrates using an Isohelix™ swab wetted with isopropyl alcohol rather than a Rayon swab with water as the wetting agent. We tested the same swabbing systems on metal (aluminum, brass, and stainless steel) and plastic substrates in a regularly touched environment to simulate the non-deliberate transfer of touch evidence likely seen in a casework scenario, to ascertain the performance of these swabs in an uncontrolled situation. Higher amounts of touch DNA were recovered with Isohelix™ swabs (0.5 - 3.3 ng) compared to Rayon swabs (0.13 - 1.2 ng). The Isohelix™ swabbing system was found to significantly recover more touch DNA (p = 0.04) from the metal substrates than the Rayon swabbing system, consistent with the findings of our previous work. The results contribute to our understanding of the impact of sample collection techniques on touch DNA recovery from problematic metal surfaces and suggest that supplemental cleaning of substrates as a precautionary step against the spread of infections may affect touch DNA persistence and the recovery efficiency of swabs.

[Research Progress on Touch DNA on Cartridge Cases in Forensic Field].

ABSTRACT: Cartridge cases are crucial physical evidence in gun-related crimes. The successful identification of the touch DNA on cartridge cases can help to screen the suspects and reconstruct the gun-related crime scene. With the improvement of DNA extraction methods and the sensitivity of amplification kit, forensic examiners are expected to obtain more valuable information by testing the touch DNA on cartridge cases. In practical cases, the touch DNA detection on cartridge cases often encounters with low DNA content degradation, mixing and the gunshot residual interference, which brings more challenges to DNA examination and identification. This article reviews forensic research of touch DNA on the cartridge cases from the aspects of factors affecting touch DNA on cartridge cases, advances in the extraction and amplification methods, and the practical applications in order to provide reference for forensic identification of touch DNA on the cartridge cases in real cases.

Persistence and detection of touch DNA and blood stain DNA on pig skin exposed to water.

As it is unclear if and how long DNA evidence can persist on submerged skin, we examined the potential for recovery of touch DNA and blood stain DNA from skin samples immersed in different aquatic environments and temperatures for forensic purposes in this proof-of-concept study. We used pig skin, either smeared with human blood or held firmly for 30 s by two test-persons, before immersing it in either cold, room-temperature or warm water as well as in a stream and a pond for up to seven days prior to DNA testing. The samples were then typed at 16 STR loci. Cold water samples yielded the most promising results, as shown by the recovery of the full set of 16 reproducible STR loci from the touch DNA sample of one test-person after 7 days. For blood stains, we were able to recover all 16 reproducible STRs after 2 days. Room-temperature water and warm water yielded varying results for both blood stain DNA and touch DNA. For pond and stream samples, DNA recovery was possible only within two days. While the pond and stream samples were at relatively cold temperatures, DNA recovery may have been affected by the presence of water insects and snails in the pond and mud in the stream. Our findings show the potential of using immersed samples, particularly those immersed in cold water, as we could detect a complete DNA profile from blood stains and from touch DNA after several days. Our study opens the way for future in-depth studies, examining larger datasets and a wider range of conditions.

The use of the M-Vac® wet-vacuum system as a method for DNA recovery.

Collecting sufficient template DNA from a crime scene sample is often challenging, especially with low quantity samples such as touch DNA (tDNA). Traditional DNA collection methods such as double swabbing have limitations, in particular when used on certain substrates which can be found at crime scenes, thus a better collection method is advantageous. Here, the effectiveness of the M-Vac® Wet-Vacuum System is evaluated as a method for DNA recovery on tiles and bricks. It was found that the M-Vac® recovered 75% more DNA than double swabbing on bricks. However, double swabbing collected significantly more DNA than the M-Vac® on tiles. Additionally, it was found that cell-free DNA is lost in the filtration step of M-Vac® collection. In terms of peak height and number of true alleles detected, no significant difference was found between the DNA profiles obtained through M-Vac® collection versus double swabbing of tDNA depositions from 12 volunteers on bricks. The results demonstrate that the M-Vac® has potential for DNA collection from porous surfaces such as bricks, but that alterations to the filter apparatus would be beneficial to increase the amount of genetic material collected for subsequent DNA profiling. These results are anticipated to be a starting point to validate the M-Vac® as a DNA collection device, providing an alternative method when DNA is present on a difficult substrate, or if traditional DNA collection methods have failed.

Single source DNA profile recovery from single cells isolated from skin and fabric from touch DNA mixtures in mock physical assaults.

The ability to obtain DNA profiles from trace biological evidence is routinely demonstrated with so-called 'touch DNA evidence', which is generally perceived to be the result of DNA obtained from shed skin cells transferred from a donor's hands to an object or person during direct physical contact. Current methods for the recovery of trace DNA employ swabs or adhesive tape to sample an area of interest. While of practical utility, such 'blind-swabbing' approaches will necessarily co-sample cellular material from the different individuals whose cells are present on the item, even though the individuals' cells are principally located in topographically dispersed, but distinct, locations on the item. Thus the act of swabbing itself artifactually creates some of the DNA mixtures encountered in touch DNA samples. In some instances involving transient contact between an assailant and victim, the victim's DNA may be found in such significant excess as to preclude the detection and typing of the perpetrator's DNA. In order to circumvent the challenges with standard recovery and analysis methods for touch DNA evidence, we reported previously the development of a 'smart analysis' single cell recovery and DNA analysis method that results in enhanced genetic analysis of touch DNA evidence. Here we use the smart single cell analysis method to recover probative single source profiles from individual and agglomerated cells from various touched objects and clothing items belonging to known donors. We then use the same approach for the detection of single source male donor DNA in simulated physical contact/assault mixture samples (i.e. male 'assailant' grabbing the wrist, neck or clothing from the female 'victim', or being in transient contact with bedding from the 'victim'). DNA profiles attributable to the male or female known donors were obtained from 31% and 35% of the single and agglomerated bio-particles (putative cells) tested. The known male donor 'assailant' DNA profile was identified in the cell sampling from every mixture type tested. The results of this work demonstrate the efficacy of an alternative strategy to recover single source perpetrator DNA profiles in physical contact/assault cases involving trace perpetrator/victim cellular admixtures.

[Application of Touch DNA in Investigation Practice].

With the continuous development of DNA extraction and testing technology, the DNA left at a crime scene plays a decisive role in the determination of criminal suspects in criminal investigation. But in the meanwhile, the anti-reconnaissance awareness of suspect is growing, which leads to a decrease of evidence left at scene during and after a crime. Therefore, in the process of evidence collection at scene, the finding and extraction of touch biological evidence, and the DNA detection are more and more important. At present, the proportion of touch evidence at the crime scene increases, which plays an increasingly important role in the detection of cases. However, with the characteristics of minute quantities, small size and secrecy, these touch evidence is difficult to be observed. What's more, various forms of pollution at the scene greatly accelerate the degradation rate of trace material, thus, the test and analysis of such material has become the emphasis and difficulty of the forensic evidence identification. This article reviews different kinds, collection and extraction methods of touch DNA, the factors that affect the detection and the problems may meet in the detection for providing an application prospect to the forensic practice.

Persistence of touch DNA on burglary-related tools.

Experts are increasingly concerned by issues regarding the activity level of DNA stains. A case from our burglary-related casework pointed out the need for experiments regarding the persistence of DNA when more than one person touched a tool handle. We performed short tandem repeat (STR) analyses for three groups of tools: (1) personal and mock owned tools; (2) tools, which were first "owned" by a first user and then handled in a burglary action by a second user; and (3) tools, which were first owned by a first user and then handled in a moderate action. At least three types of tool handles were included in each of the groups. Every second user handled the tool with and without gloves. In total, 234 samples were analyzed regarding profile completeness of first and second user as well as properties like detectable major profile or mixture attributes. When second users simulated a burglary by using a tool bare handed, we could not detect the first user as major component on their handles but attribute him to the stain in 1/40 cases. When second users broke up the burglary setup using gloves, the first user matched the DNA handle profile in 37% of the cases. Moderate use of mock borrowed tools demonstrated a material-dependent persistence. In total, we observed that the outcome depends mainly on the nature of contact, the handle material, and the user-specific characteristics. This study intends to supplement present knowledge about persistence of touch DNA with a special emphasis on burglary-related cases with two consecutive users and to act as experimental data for an evaluation of the relevance of alleged hypotheses, when such is needed in a court hearing.

Sex-specific age association with primary DNA transfer.

Practicing forensic scientists who are called to provide expert witness testimony are often asked to explain both the presence and the absence of DNA on objects that have been handled by perpetrators with bare hands. Unwashed hands, depending on what they have come in contact with previously, may become the vehicle of both primary and secondary transfer of DNA. In this study, we investigated the propensity of primary and secondary transfer of DNA from unwashed bare hands of 128 individuals onto plastic tubes. Our experiments, carried out in triplicate, have shown that DNA was not detected on all the touched tubes, secondary transfer of DNA, through unwashed hands, was small, and in the majority of cases primary DNA transfer could be distinguished from secondary DNA transfer. A statistically significant association was demonstrated between percent DNA profile deposited on plastic tubes, through unwashed hands, and the age of male individuals.

Touch DNA-The prospect of DNA profiles from cables.

Metal theft in the railroad industry poses significant challenges to transport investigators. Cable sheaths left behind at crime scenes, if appropriately analysed, could provide valuable evidence in a forensic investigation, but attempts at recovering DNA are not routinely made. Experiments were set up to ascertain the success in DNA recovery from the surface of cable sheaths after deposition of (a) sweat, (b) extracted DNA and (c) fingermarks. Since investigators try to collect fingermarks and often treat the cables with cyanoacrylate fuming (CNA fuming) or wet powder suspensions (WPS) to enhance the marks this study investigated the recovery of DNA from fingermarks pre- and post-enhancement. The double-swab technique and mini-taping were compared as options to recover DNA from the cable sheaths. Results demonstrate that generally, there is no significant difference between using swabs or mini-tapes to recover the DNA from the non-porous cables (p>0.05). It was also illustrated that CNA fuming performed better than WPS in terms of subsequent recovery and profiling of DNA. CNA fuming resulted in an average increase in DNA recovered via swabbing and taping (more than 4× and 8×, respectively), as compared to no treatment, with 50% of the DNA recovered after CNA fuming generating full DNA profiles.

Shedding more light on shedders.

We report on testing 100 individuals for their shedder status with the aim of demonstrating whether the process of cell staining is reproducible when testing a large number of people. A previous report using the same method was based on 11 donors and indicated that there may be a continuum of shedder types within this small sample set. In this report we also expand the time points post-handwashing to 0, 15, 30, 60, and 180 min. Triplicate samples were collected from both the right and left thumbs. Samples were collected by donors placing a thumb on a clean glass slide and then adding a DNA binding dye. The number of cells were recorded within three separate square millimetre areas (cells/mm2) at 220x magnification. The experiments were conducted in triplicate on three different days, giving a total of 72 thumbprints per individual. Finally, there were 3438 observed frames in the entire dataset. Of the 100 donors, 98 gave consistent and reproducible cell number deposition. There was no difference between the cells deposited by the left and right thumbs in 13 of 15 tested. Males tended to deposit more cells than females. If applying arbitrary boundary to a cell count to definitively determine shedder status, then many of the donors fell within two categories. This study based on 100 individuals strongly suggests that shedder status is a continuum phenomenon.

Transfer and recovery of DNA and metal particles: A proof-of-concept application of a parallel strategy by DNA and environmental scanning electron microscopy analysis.

According to the principle of Locard "Every contact leaves a trace", when touching a surface, a bi-directional transfer of self and non-self-DNA residing on the hands and touched objects can occur. Metals are commonly encountered in forensic evidence and, during hand contact with these surfaces, a transfer of metal particles could occur together with the transfer of human DNA. This study proposes a proof-concept approach for the original detection of metal particles and touch DNA to track the activity performed by a donor and particularly to assess the metallic substrate touched before the contact with a subsequent surface. To this scope, a scenario of contact events was simulated by three volunteers, who participated in fingerprint deposition firstly on copper and then on plastic and glass surfaces. Twenty-four stubs were collected on the hands of volunteers and the secondary surfaces and then analyzed by environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM). DNA was quantified only from copper and plastic surfaces. Ten additional volunteers followed the same protocol of deposition on copper and then on plastic surfaces to evaluate DNA transfer only. On 20 touch DNA samples, the copper surface yielded significantly lower DNA amounts, ranging from 0.001 to 0.129 ng/µl, compared to the secondary touched plastic surface, ranging from 0.007 to 0.362 ng/µl. ESEM-EDS analysis showed that copper particles could be abundantly detected on the hands of the volunteers after contact with the copper surface. Particles containing silicates with copper were shown on plastic, while they were only found in 1/3 of samples on glass. Our proof-of-concept study has shown that ESEM-EDS analysis has the potential to detect copper particles transferred to the hands of volunteers during contact with a copper metallic surface and deposited on secondarily touched items. The results suggest that this original ESEM-DNA parallel approach could potentially allow the tracking of DNA transfer and metal particles at a crime scene, although this represents only a first step and further research on a wider casuistry could help to address the interpretation of results given activity level propositions.

Cell counting to monitor swab efficiency.

Plastic bags, such as ziplock bags, have been used to transport illicit materials worldwide; however, very few studies have tried to optimize the recovery of DNA from these items. This study reports on the best combination of swabs and moistening solution for the greatest recovery of cellular material from ziplock bags. Five swabs, two different variations of Copan Diagnostics nylon 4N6FLOQSwabs, one Medical Wire rayon DRYSWAB, one IsoHelix rayon swab, and one Livingstone cotton swab, were evaluated with two moistening solutions, Triton X-100 in either distilled water or isopropanol. Fingermarks were deposited on ziplock bags and stained with Diamond™ Nucleic Acid Dye to allow visualization of the cells pre- and post-swabbing to determine the number of cells recovered. Based on cell counting data, swabs moistened with Triton X-100 in distilled water performed better than those moistened with isopropanol. Livingstone cotton swabs had the worst recovery of cellular material, while the other swabs tested had no significant difference in their respective solutions. A comparison of the best three swabs for cellular recovery yielded no differences in the DNA concentration extracted. A linear relationship was observed between the log number of cells recovered by swabbing and the DNA concentration following extraction and quantification. The process of monitoring cell collection using fluorescence microscopy on ziplock bags allowed evaluation of swabbing efficacy. Additionally, this study highlights the ability to evaluate cellular recovery independently of traditional extraction, quantification, or profiling techniques which may unequally affect samples.