DNA recovery after sequential processing of latent fingerprints on black polyethylene plastic.

Latent fingerprints on plastic substrates can be visualized by using sequential treatments to enhance the contrast between the fingerprint residues and underlying substrate; however, the extent to which these processes affect subsequent DNA analysis is mostly unknown. Latent fingerprints deposited on black plastic by one donor were visualized with single-process fingerprint powders (i.e., white powder, bichromatic powder, or bichromatic magnetic powder) or sequential treatments (i.e., laser → reflected ultraviolet imaging system (RUVIS) → CA fuming → RUVIS → Rhodamine 6G, Ardrox, and MBD (RAM) or CA fuming → RAM/laser → bichromatic magnetic powder). Samples were examined after the addition of each treatment. DNA was collected using cotton swabs, extracted, quantified, and amplified. DNA yields, peak heights, number of alleles obtained, and percentage of DNA profiles eligible for CODIS upload were examined. Latent fingerprints processed with the laser and up to three sequential treatments generated DNA profiles with significantly higher peaks heights than those of the untreated samples. Fingerprints processed with the laser and up to two sequential treatments generated DNA profiles with significantly more alleles. All methods beginning with laser enhancement generated more CODIS-eligible profiles. Additional research is needed to determine the extent to which initial laser enhancement impacts the success of downstream DNA profiling results. Although DNA profile development is not guaranteed due to the variable quantities of DNA contained within latent fingerprints, the selection of an appropriate latent fingerprint visualization method could maximize both fingerprint detection and the generation of CODIS-eligible DNA profiles.

DNA recovery after sequential processing of latent fingerprints on copy paper.

Forensic examiners must determine whether both latent fingerprint development and DNA profiling can be performed on the same area of an evidence item and, if only one is possible, which examination offers the best chance for identification. Latent fingerprints can be enhanced by targeting different components of fingerprint residues with sequential chemical treatments. This study investigated the effects of single-reagent and sequential latent fingerprint development processes on downstream DNA analysis to determine the point at which latent fingerprint development should be stopped to allow for DNA recovery. Latent fingerprints deposited on copy paper by one donor were developed using three sequential processes: 1,8-diazafluoren-9-one (DFO) â†’ ninhydrin â†’ physical developer (PD); 1,2-indanedione-zinc (IND-Zn) â†’ ninhydrin â†’ PD; and IND-Zn â†’ ninhydrin â†’ Oil Red O (ORO) â†’ PD. Samples were examined after the addition of each chemical treatment. DNA was collected with cotton swabs, extracted, quantified, and amplified. DNA yields, peak heights, number of alleles obtained, and percentage of DNA profiles eligible for CODIS upload were examined. DNA profiles were obtained with varying degrees of success, depending on the number and type of treatments used for latent fingerprint development. The treatments that were found to be the least harmful to downstream DNA analysis were IND-Zn and IND-Zn/laser, and the most detrimental treatments were DFO, DFO/laser, and PD. In general, as the number of treatments increase, the opportunities for DNA loss or damage also increase, and it is preferable to use fewer treatments when developing latent fingerprints prior to downstream DNA processing.

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.