Probability of detection of DNA deposited by habitual wearer and/or the second individual who touched the garment

Breathnach, Michelle; Williams, Linda Ruth; McKenna, Louise; Moore, Elizabeth

doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.10.001

Cited by 59 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Detection of indirectly-transferred unknown DNA alongside expected DNA from the donor has been repeatedly reported, commonly at ≤10% of the profiles obtained, by studies involving handling or wearing of items and DNA profiling using the more sensitive kits [4,10,11,15,16,[25][26][27][28]. It is proposed that hands acquire such nondonor DNA via everyday activities that involve touching other people and other items that have been previously handled [10,16,20,27,28].…”

Section: Detection Of Indirectly-transferred Unknown Dnamentioning

confidence: 99%

Trace DNA evidence dynamics: An investigation into the deposition and persistence of directly- and indirectly-transferred DNA on regularly-used knives

Meakin¹,

Butcher²,

Oorschot

et al. 2017

Forensic Science International: Genetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empirical data on the transfer and persistence of trace DNA are crucial to the evaluation of forensic DNA evidence. This evaluation can be complicated by the occurrence of indirect DNA transfer; the possibility of which is well established, but research into such transfer is often focussed on unrealistic situations, e.g. handling of DNA-free items after participants have shaken hands for 1-2min. To simulate more realistic scenarios, this study investigated the deposition and persistence of both directly- and indirectly-transferred DNA on knives that had been artificially set up as 'regularly-used'. Each knife was handled in a prescribed manner by a specific participant over two consecutive days to simulate regular use. Each participant then shook hands for 10s with a fellow volunteer and immediately stabbed one of their knives into a foam block repeatedly for 60s. DNA was recovered by mini-taping from triplicate sets of knife handles from four pairings of volunteers after regular use, and at one hour, one day and one week after the handshaking and stabbing events. Total amounts of DNA recovered from the knives, regularly used by a single person, varied among individuals; one volunteer consistently deposited significantly greater amounts than the others, whilst another volunteer did not always leave complete profiles. DNA attributed to the regular user persisted for at least a week, declining with increasing time between DNA deposition and recovery. Non-donor DNA was co-deposited at <5% of the profiles recovered, except for one volunteer, who consistently left DNA from their romantic partner on their knives at ∼25% and ∼11% of the profiles before and after the handshaking and stabbing events, respectively. In three pairings of volunteers, after the handshaking and stabbing events, alleles that could be attributed to the respective handshakers' profiles were detected as partial minor profiles, equating to ∼10% of the profiles recovered. For the fourth pairing of volunteers, only complete single-source DNA profiles matching the regular user's profile were recovered. However, it is important to note that, when indirectly-transferred handshaker DNA was detected, it declined with increasing time between DNA deposition and recovery. These data provide an initial insight into the detection and persistence of directly- and indirectly-transferred DNA that extend the data already available on forensic DNA transfer. The results herein suggest that the sooner an item is sampled after an offence has occurred, the greater the chance of recovering indirectly-transferred DNA, which has implications for forensic reconstructions.

show abstract

Section: Detection Of Indirectly-transferred Unknown Dnamentioning

confidence: 99%

Trace DNA evidence dynamics: An investigation into the deposition and persistence of directly- and indirectly-transferred DNA on regularly-used knives

Meakin¹,

Butcher²,

Oorschot

et al. 2017

Forensic Science International: Genetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Addressing the issues we raised in the experimental setup is bound to lead to a significant reduction of the observed secondary transfer events and bring the outcome more in line with similar studies on secondary transfer of DNA (8,9) and with casework practice.…”

Section: Sirmentioning

confidence: 67%

Cale CM, Earll ME, Latham KE, Bush GL. Could Secondary DNA Transfer Falsely Place Someone at the Scene of a Crime? J Forensic Sci 2016;61(1):196–203

Kokshoorn

Aarts

Ansell

et al. 2016

Journal of Forensic Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…When someone is accused of a crime they may legitimately set forth an alternative explanation for the presence of their DNA, to that proposed by the prosecution. The question of significance has driven a multitude of studies in the area of DNA transfer and persistence (2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7).…”

Section: A Study Of the Background Levels Of Male Dna On Underpants Wmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In such cases, the significance of finding autosomal nonwearer DNA on the inside front of underpants has been explored by the Association of Forensic Science Providers' (AFSP) Body Fluid Forum (BFF) and that work has been incorporated in our experimental design (14). However, until now the background levels of male DNA on underpants worn by females, identified by male-specific Y-STR profiling, in the absence of sexual intercourse had not been assessed (7). Some work has been carried out on the presence of male DNA profiles in casework samples and on internal vaginal swabs (8,15,16).…”

Section: A Study Of the Background Levels Of Male Dna On Underpants Wmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Study of the Background Levels of Male DNA on Underpants Worn by Females

Murphy

Kenna

Flanagan

et al. 2019

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study is the first to examine the background level of male DNA on underpants worn by females in the absence of sexual contact. Here, we examined 103 samples from the inside front of underpants from 85 female volunteers. Samples were examined for the presence of male DNA using NGM SElect and PowerPlex Y23 kits. Only five samples gave a “complete” Y‐STR profile, even though 83.5% of our volunteers cohabited with a male. In all cases where a partner reference sample was available, the Y‐STR profile matched the cohabiting partner. We have demonstrated that a Y‐STR profile is not expected on the inside front of underpants worn by females after social contact alone. The results of this study are informative for evaluating the significance of a Y‐STR profile on underpants in cases of alleged sexual assault.

show abstract

Probability of detection of DNA deposited by habitual wearer and/or the second individual who touched the garment

Cited by 59 publications

References 14 publications

Trace DNA evidence dynamics: An investigation into the deposition and persistence of directly- and indirectly-transferred DNA on regularly-used knives

Trace DNA evidence dynamics: An investigation into the deposition and persistence of directly- and indirectly-transferred DNA on regularly-used knives

Cale CM, Earll ME, Latham KE, Bush GL. Could Secondary DNA Transfer Falsely Place Someone at the Scene of a Crime? J Forensic Sci 2016;61(1):196–203

A Study of the Background Levels of Male DNA on Underpants Worn by Females

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About