Nondestructive Biological Evidence Collection with Alternative Swabs and Adhesive Lifters.

In forensic science, biological material is typically collected from evidence via wet/dry double swabbing with cotton swabs, which is effective but can visibly damage an item's surface. When an item's appearance must be maintained, dry swabbing and tape-lifting may be employed as collection techniques that are visually nondestructive to substrates' surfaces. This study examined the efficacy of alternative swab matrices and adhesive lifters when collecting blood and fingerprints from glass, painted drywall, 100% cotton, and copy paper. Data were evaluated by determining the percent profile and quality score for each STR profile generated. Hydraflock(®) swabs, BVDA Gellifters(®) , and Scenesafe FAST™ tape performed as well as or better than cotton swabs when collecting fingerprints from painted drywall and 100% cotton. Collection success was also dependent on the type of biological material sampled and the substrate on which it was deposited. These results demonstrated that alternative swabs and adhesive lifters can be effective for nondestructive DNA collection from various substrates.

ESDA®-Lite collection of DNA from latent fingerprints on documents.

The ability to detect and non-destructively collect biological samples for DNA processing would benefit the forensic community by preserving the physical integrity of evidentiary items for more thorough evaluations by other forensic disciplines. The Electrostatic Detection Apparatus (ESDA®) was systemically evaluated for its ability to non-destructively collect DNA from latent fingerprints deposited on various paper substrates for short tandem repeat (STR) DNA profiling. Fingerprints were deposited on a variety of paper substrates that included resume paper, cotton paper, magazine paper, currency, copy paper, and newspaper. Three DNA collection techniques were performed: ESDA collection, dry swabbing, and substrate cutting. Efficacy of each collection technique was evaluated by the quantity of DNA present in each sample and the percent profile generated by each sample. Both the ESDA and dry swabbing non-destructive sampling techniques outperformed the destructive methodology of substrate cutting. A greater number of full profiles were generated from samples collected with the non-destructive dry swabbing collection technique than were generated from samples collected with the ESDA; however, the ESDA also allowed the user to visualize the area of interest while non-destructively collecting the biological material. The ability to visualize the biological material made sampling straightforward and eliminated the need for numerous, random swabbings/cuttings. Based on these results, the evaluated non-destructive ESDA collection technique has great potential for real-world forensic implementation.