A comparison of methods used in the UK and Ireland for the extraction and detection of semen on swabs and cloth samples

Allard, Julie; Baird, Andrew D.; Davidson, G.; Jones, S. J.; Jw, Lewis; McKenna, Louise; Weston, Claire; Scrimger, D.G.; Teppett, G.

doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2007.09.010

Cited by 46 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results show that the direct method (applying the filter paper directly to the microfilter) was more likely to obtain a positive AP result than the swabbing method. These findings concur with the work completed by Allard et al [17] who determined that detecting AP on swabs seeded with various dilutions of semen was "best achieved" by a direct test. The swabbing method relies on additional water being added to the swab head and the suspension produced being tested, therefore resulting in an even greater dilution of any acid phosphatase present.…”

Section: Negativesupporting

confidence: 91%

The recovery of semen from bathwater using the Evidence Recovery System (ERS)

Page¹,

Sarna²,

Watts³

et al. 2014

Science & Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sexual offences are under-reported and ascertaining accurate offence numbers is difficult. Any methods which could increase the ability to obtain biological evidence or reduce the additional distress associated with reporting a sexual offence may result in an increase in reporting this crime type. The Evidence Recovery System (ERS) is designed to collect trace evidence, including hairs, fibres and biological evidence, from bath or shower water in a non-invasive manner. Initially, samples of semen were placed in baths filled with water, and washing was simulated using a range of body wash products. The water was then drained through the ERS before its filters were subjected to acid phosphatase testing and haematoxylin and eosin staining of spermatozoa. Recovered spermatozoa were then graded accordingly. Following this, the experiment was repeated with the addition of dirt/dust particulates during the washing stage, to simulate recovery of biological evidence in a more realistic environment. The results showed that spermatozoa considered 'easy to find' could regularly be obtained from bathwater using the ERS. It appeared that this recovery was not affected by the presence of different body wash products. When dust/dirt particles were added, the number of spermatozoa recovered increased at two of the evidence collection stages. The difference in recovery was considered to be statistically significant. This study provides evidence to suggest the feasibility of use of the ERS as a method to collect semen evidence from individuals subjected to sexual offences. The recovery of spermatozoa does not appear to be affected by the presence of a body wash, but does appear to be improved when skin cells, hair and other debris are transferred into the water, as would be likely during a bath/shower. Further to this, the possibility of obtaining spermatozoa from the home bath or shower of a victim following a post-offence bathing experience is implied.

show abstract

Section: Negativesupporting

confidence: 91%

The recovery of semen from bathwater using the Evidence Recovery System (ERS)

Page¹,

Sarna²,

Watts³

et al. 2014

Science & Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, a positive result in all the techniques used reached a frequency of about 1 of 3 cases (Category I) and was able to predict a complete Y-STR profiling that adds the benefit of assailant identification [26] while a negative result by all these techniques (Category VI) strongly predicts the absence of both semen and male DNA profiling although epithelial fractions would allow obtaining Y-STR profiles. Nevertheless the generalized use of standardized PSA rapid tests coupled to Y-STR typing or other PCR-based protocols still deserves further research on identification of best practices based on inter-laboratory comparisons [27]. Also, this will require a greater financial support from forensic authorities to the analytical infrastructure in a still significant number of laboratories in the world.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship of spermatoscopy, prostatic acid phosphatase activity and prostate-specific antigen (p30) assays with further DNA typing in forensic samples from rape cases

Romero-Montoya¹,

Martínez-Rodríguez²,

Pérez³

et al. 2011

Forensic Science International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The whole swab semen extraction method [10] used in the Forensic Science Laboratory generates a 300 ml final volume of supernatant. 40 ml of this supernatant was pipetted into 1.5 ml microcentrifuge tubes containing 260 ml RSID TM -saliva extraction buffer.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Animal saliva samples (buccal swabs) from guinea pig, cat, dog, mouse and sheep were used for species specificity. Case work samples of vulva swabs from complainants processed through the full swab semen extraction method [10], were further tested for the presence of human salivary a-amylase. Controls included; positive Forensic Science International 194 (2010) 67-71 human buccal swabs, negative unused swabs, swabs of fresh neat urine, swabs of semen or blood.…”

Section: Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%