Detection of invisible biological traces in relation to the physicochemical properties of substrates surfaces in forensic casework.
Adhesion/cytoskeleton proteins
Carbohydrate patterns
DNA
Fingermarks
In vitro forensic models
Keratinocyte cells
Substrate’ physicochemical characteristics
Touch DNA
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 06 2024
10 06 2024
Historique:
received:
19
03
2024
accepted:
03
06
2024
medline:
11
6
2024
pubmed:
11
6
2024
entrez:
10
6
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Touch DNA, which can be found at crime scenes, consists of invisible biological traces deposited through a person's skin's contact with an object or another person. Many factors influence touch DNA transfer, including the "destination" substrate's surface. The latter's physicochemical characteristics (wettability, roughness, surface energy, etc.) will impact touch DNA deposition and persistence on a substrate. We selected a representative panel of substrates from objects found at crime scenes (glass, polystyrene, tiles, raw wood, etc.) to investigate the impact of these characteristics on touch DNA deposition and detection. These were shown to impact cell deposition, morphology, retention, and subsequent touch DNA genetic analysis. Interestingly, cell-derived fragments found within keratinocyte cells and fingermarks using in vitro touch DNA models could be successfully detected whichever the substrates' physicochemistry by targeting cellular proteins and carbohydrates for two months, indoors and outdoors. However, swabbing and genetic analyses of such mock traces from different substrates produced informative profiles mainly for substrates with the highest surface free energy and therefore the most hydrophilic. The substrates' intrinsic characteristics need to be considered to better understand both the transfer and persistence of biological traces, as well as their detection and collection, which require an appropriate methodology and sampling device to get informative genetic profiles.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38858407
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-63911-1
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-63911-1
doi:
Substances chimiques
DNA
9007-49-2
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
13271Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Van Oorschot, R. A., Ballantyne, K. N. & Mitchell, R. J. Forensic trace DNA: A review. Invest. Genet. 1, 14 (2010).
doi: 10.1186/2041-2223-1-14
Burrill, J., Daniel, B. & Frascione, N. A review of trace “Touch DNA” deposits: Variability factors and an exploration of cellular composition. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 39, 8–18 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.11.019
pubmed: 30513439
Sessa, F. et al. Touch DNA: Impact of handling time on touch deposit and evaluation of different recovery techniques: An experimental study. Sci. Rep. 9, 9542 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-46051-9
pubmed: 31267029
pmcid: 6606590
Kaesler, T., Kirkbride, K. P. & Linacre, A. Persistence of touch DNA on commonly encountered substrates in different storage conditions. Forensic Sci. Int. 348, 111728 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2023.111728
pubmed: 37209547
van Oorschot, R. A. H. & Jones, M. K. DNA fingerprints from fingerprints. Nature 387, 767–767 (1997).
doi: 10.1038/42838
pubmed: 9194555
Tobias, S. H. A., Jacques, G. S., Morgan, R. M. & Meakin, G. E. The effect of pressure on DNA deposition by touch. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. Suppl. Ser. 6, e12–e14 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigss.2017.09.020
Lowe, A., Murray, C., Whitaker, J., Tully, G. & Gill, P. The propensity of individuals to deposit DNA and secondary transfer of low level DNA from individuals to inert surfaces. Forensic Sci. Int. 129, 25–34 (2002).
doi: 10.1016/S0379-0738(02)00207-4
pubmed: 12230994
Goray, M., Fowler, S., Szkuta, B. & van Oorschot, R. A. H. Shedder status: An analysis of self and non-self DNA in multiple handprints deposited by the same individuals over time. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 23, 190–196 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.05.005
pubmed: 27209099
Thornbury, D., Goray, M. & Van Oorschot, R. A. H. Indirect DNA transfer without contact from dried biological materials on various surfaces. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 51, 102457 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102457
pubmed: 33465559
Moret, S., Spindler, X., Lennard, C. & Roux, C. Microscopic examination of fingermark residues: Opportunities for fundamental studies. Forensic Sci. Int. 255, 28–37 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.05.027
pubmed: 26093907
Belhadjamor, M., El Mansori, M., Belghith, S. & Mezlini, S. Anti-fingerprint properties of engineering surfaces: A review. Surf. Eng. 34, 85–120 (2018).
doi: 10.1080/02670844.2016.1258449
Hughes, D. A., Szkuta, B., van Oorschot, R. A. H., Yang, W. & Conlan, X. A. Impact of surface roughness on the deposition of saliva and fingerprint residue on non-porous substrates. Forensic Chem. 23, 100318 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.forc.2021.100318
Hughes, D. A., Szkuta, B., Oorschot, R. A. H. V. & Conlan, X. A. How changes to the substrate’s physical characteristics can influence the deposition of touch and salivary deposits. Forensic Sci. Int. 343, 111546 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2022.111546
pubmed: 36621057
Champion, J., Kanokwongnuwut, P., Oorschot, R. A. H., Taylor, D. & Linacre, A. Evaluation of a fluorescent dye to visualize touch DNA on various substrates. J. Forensic Sci. 66, 1435–1442 (2021).
doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.14695
pubmed: 33629435
Martin, B. et al. Successful STR amplification of post-blast IED samples by fluorescent visualisation and direct PCR. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 46, 102256 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102256
pubmed: 32028221
Kanokwongnuwut, P., Paul Kirkbride, K. & Linacre, A. An assessment of tape-lifts. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 47, 102292 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102292
pubmed: 32248081
Tonkrongjun, P. et al. Touch DNA localization and direct PCR: An improved workflow for STR typing from improvise explosive devices. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 6, e610–e612 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigss.2017.09.228
Recipon, M. et al. Targeting cell-derived markers to improve the detection of invisible biological traces for the purpose of genetic-based criminal identification. Sci. Rep. 13, 18105 (2023).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-45366-y
pubmed: 37872292
pmcid: 10593828
Dierig, L., Schmidt, M. & Wiegand, P. Looking for the pinpoint: Optimizing identification, recovery and DNA extraction of micro traces in forensic casework. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 44, 102191 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.102191
pubmed: 31756628
Kanokwongnuwut, P., Martin, B., Taylor, D., Kirkbride, K. P. & Linacre, A. How many cells are required for successful DNA profiling?. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 51, 102453 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102453
pubmed: 33422808
Cavanaugh, S. E. & Bathrick, A. S. Direct PCR amplification of forensic touch and other challenging DNA samples: A review. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 32, 40–49 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.10.005
pubmed: 29059581
Raymond, J. J., van Oorschot, R. A. H., Gunn, P. R., Walsh, S. J. & Roux, C. Trace evidence characteristics of DNA: A preliminary investigation of the persistence of DNA at crime scenes. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 4, 26–33 (2009).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2009.04.002
pubmed: 19948331
Cook, R., Mitchell, N. & Henry, J. Assessment of Diamond™ nucleic acid dye for the identification and targeted sampling of latent DNA in operational casework. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 55, 102579 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2021.102579
pubmed: 34455366
Tang, J., Ostrander, J., Wickenheiser, R. & Hall, A. Touch DNA in forensic science: The use of laboratory-created eccrine fingerprints to quantify DNA loss. Forensic Sci. Int. Synergy 2, 1–16 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2019.10.004
pubmed: 32411992
Burrill, J., Daniel, B. & Frascione, N. Illuminating touch deposits through cellular characterization of hand rinses and body fluids with nucleic acid fluorescence. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 46, 102269 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102269
pubmed: 32155589
Burrill, J., Rammenou, E., Alawar, F., Daniel, B. & Frascione, N. Corneocyte lysis and fragmented DNA considerations for the cellular component of forensic touch DNA. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 51, 102428 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102428
pubmed: 33338861
Lee, L. Y. C. et al. Persistence of DNA in the Singapore context. Int. J. Legal Med. 133, 1341–1349 (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s00414-019-02077-2
pubmed: 31168697
Gill, P. Application of low copy number DNA profiling. Croat. Med. J. 42, 229–232 (2001).
pubmed: 11387628
Falkena, K. et al. Prediction of DNA concentration in fingermarks using autofluorescence properties. Forensic Sci. Int. 295, 128–136 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.12.005
pubmed: 30583268
Wilson, C. J., Clegg, R. E., Leavesley, D. I. & Pearcy, M. J. Mediation of biomaterial-cell interactions by adsorbed proteins: A review. Tissue Eng. 11, 1–18 (2005).
doi: 10.1089/ten.2005.11.1
pubmed: 15738657
Hefetz, I., Einot, N., Faerman, M., Horowitz, M. & Almog, J. Touch DNA: The effect of the deposition pressure on the quality of latent fingermarks and STR profiles. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 38, 105–112 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.10.016
pubmed: 30391623