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

Meixner, Eva; Kallupurackal, Venus; Krätzer, A.; Voegeli, P.; Thali, Michael J.; Bolliger, Stephan A.

doi:10.1007/s12024-020-00234-3

Cited by 12 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, few studies of skeletal DNA extractions, human or marine animal, have been conducted with an extended time series or with consistent environmental exposure between samples to evaluate environmental effects on DNA quantity and sequence quality. Previous work has demonstrated the detrimental effect of saltwater on human DNA recovery (Borde et al, 2008;Frippiat et al, 2017;Helmus et al, 2018;Meixner et al, 2020). Our results support the tenant that terrestrial samples generally yield higher DNA quantities than samples experiencing prolonged exposure to marine environments.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…However, these investigations often are hindered by DNA degradation and insufficient quantities of genetic material, which is influenced by time, type of tissue, and the environment. The importance of environmental exposure has been well documented in soft tissues (e.g., blood, saliva); for example, UV light (Hall et al, 2014), high levels of humidity and temperature (Dissing et al, 2010;Al-Kandari et al, 2016), and submergence in fresh or saltwater (Borde et al, 2008;Frippiat et al, 2017;Helmus et al, 2018;Meixner et al, 2020). However, these studies investigated a controlled set of variables in a laboratory setting, rather than field exposures, and often for only days or weeks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mitochondrial DNA Evaluation and Species Identification of Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) Bones After a 3-Year Exposure to Submerged Marine and Terrestrial Environments

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because Kemp’s ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys kempii) are critically endangered and closely related to the vulnerable olive ridleys (L. olivacea), it is essential for forensic investigations and conservation efforts to distinguish these species when only skeletal elements remain. DNA extraction and analysis by DNA sequencing of genetic markers is the only method to determine species identity reliably, yet these methods are significantly compromised when DNA becomes degraded. To evaluate the role that time and environment play in obtaining high-quality DNA sequencing data, we placed skeletal elements of a terrestrial mammal (Bos taurus) and L. kempii in a supratidal and subtidal environment for 3 years. Bi-annual sampling revealed that after 3 years, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) consistently identified each species from each environment. Our results show that mtDNA recovery from bone and identification for Kemp’s ridley sea turtles was possible up to 3 years in both environments. All sequencing data obtained was accurate and robust, but DNA sequencing results were not consistent after 664-days of exposure. Our findings led us to conclude that if sufficient DNA is extracted from bone samples, then high-quality sequence data can be obtained, and the resulting sequence data accurately reflects the reference sequence for the given gene marker. This study provides evidence that DNA can be extracted and analyzed from challenging biological substrates, like bone, when these substrates are exposed to seasonally dynamic maritime environmental conditions for up to 3-years.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitochondrial DNA Evaluation and Species Identification of Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) Bones After a 3-Year Exposure to Submerged Marine and Terrestrial Environments

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent study investigated the persistence of touch DNA on pig skin specimens immersed in water [27]. It was observed that, depending on the aquatic environment, a complete STR profile from touch DNA could be obtained even several days after immersion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was possible to recover partial offender profiles from the neck of a strangulation victim after up to ten days, as long as the neck of the victim was not washed or touched after the crime. A recent study investigated the persistence of touch DNA on pig skin specimens immersed in water [27]. It was observed that, depending on the aquatic environment, a complete STR profile from touch DNA could be obtained even several days after immersion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sampling touch DNA from human skin following skin‐to‐skin contact in mock assault scenarios—A comparison of nine collection methods

Kallupurackal

Kummer²,

Voegeli

et al. 2021

Journal of Forensic Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collection of touch DNA from an offender on the victim's skin can provide relevant evidence for investigations of criminal cases. Therefore, the choice of the optimal sample collection method is crucial. In this study, we investigated the recovery of STR profiles from touch DNA on human skin by comparing nine different collection methods: the dry and wet cotton swabs in three different movements, the double-swab (wet-dry) method, the wet and dry Copan FLOQSwabs™, and the Scene Safe FAST™ minitapes. Mock assault scenarios were conducted with a male offender grasping the forearms of a female victim. Samples were collected from the assaulted area of the victim's skin, and the recovery of the offender's STR profile was evaluated. Our results indicate that the different swabs and swabbing techniques did not have a distinct impact on the STR recovery; however, the lowest STR recovery was achieved with Scene Safe FAST™ minitapes. In addition, we compared the double-swab method to the single-swab method by analyzing the DNA quantity of the wet and dry swabs separately. We found on average 13.7% more offender DNA using the double-swab method, but this did not translate into higher STR recovery. Our findings indicate that several methods perform equally well when collecting touch DNA from human skin, although SceneSafe FAST™ minitapes seem to be the least adequate for this purpose.

show abstract

“…Por exemplo, amostras de DNA de toque podem ser recuperadas para gerar perfis STR mesmo após passarem dias submersas em água, mas isso dependerá das características do ambiente aquático em que a amostra foi depositada (água fria, quente ou temperatura ambiente, presença de luz na água, correnteza, biota etc.) (Meixner et al, 2020).…”

Section: Variáveis Que Afetam a Obtenção De Perfis De Dnaunclassified

Estudo de DNA de toque em situações simuladas para finalidades forenses

Francisco¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

Cited by 12 publications

References 31 publications

Mitochondrial DNA Evaluation and Species Identification of Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) Bones After a 3-Year Exposure to Submerged Marine and Terrestrial Environments

Mitochondrial DNA Evaluation and Species Identification of Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) Bones After a 3-Year Exposure to Submerged Marine and Terrestrial Environments

Sampling touch DNA from human skin following skin‐to‐skin contact in mock assault scenarios—A comparison of nine collection methods

Estudo de DNA de toque em situações simuladas para finalidades forenses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About