Evaluation of DNA Extraction Methods for Processing Fingerprint Powder‐Coated Forensic Evidence

Abstract

In unison, fingerprinting and DNA analysis have played a pivotal role in forensic investigations. Fingerprint powders that are available on the market can come in a range of colors and with specific properties. This study evaluated the efficiency of DNA extraction from samples coated with 3 brands of fingerprint powders: Lightning, Sirchie, and SupraNano, covering a range of colors and properties. A total of 23 fingerprint powders were tested using the Chelex, Promega DNA IQ TM , and Applied Biosystems TM PrepFiler TM DNA extraction protocols. The DNA IQ TM and PrepFiler TM methods extracted higher yields of DNA in comparison to Chelex, which also accounted for better quality of PowerPlexâ 21 DNA profiles recovered. There were no signs of degradation or inhibition in the quantification data, indicating that samples returning low DNA yield was due to interference during DNA extraction and not PCR inhibition. DNA profiles were recovered from the majority of fingerprint powders with only a single powder, Sirchie Magnetic Silver, failing to produce a profile using any of the methods tested. A link was observed between the DNA extraction chemistry, fingerprint powder property, that is, nonmagnetic, magnetic and aqueous, and the brand of fingerprint powder. Overall, the DNA IQ TM method was favorable for nonmagnetic fingerprint powders, while magnetic fingerprint powders produced more DNA profiles when extracted with the PrepFiler TM chemistry. This study highlights the importance of screening DNA extraction chemistries for the type of fingerprint powder used, as there is not a single DNA extraction method that suits all fingerprint powder brands and properties.

Recent advances in forensic biology and forensic DNA typing: INTERPOL review 2019–2022

“…Various studies have explored the compatibility of common fingerprint processing methods with DNA typing results [ [178] , [179] , [180] , [181] , [182] , [183] , [184] , [185] , [186] , [187] , [188] ]. For example, DNA recovery was explored after various steps in three different latent fingerprint processing methods – and fewer treatments were judged preferable with a 1,2-indanedione-zinc (IND/Zn) method appearing least harmful to downstream DNA analysis [ 187 ].…”

Preliminary Study: DNA Transfer and Persistence on Non-Porous Surfaces Submerged in Spring Water

“…Because fingerprints are retained on submerged non-porous evidence, it was hypothesized that the insoluble components of fingerprint secretions may protect DNA by trapping any residual epithelial cells between the secretions and the surface itself, permitting trace DNA recovery even under submerged conditions. Previous studies have highlighted the ability to obtain DNA from latent fingerprints [15][16][17][18]. Investigators and analysts could utilize this knowledge to determine the cost-benefit of pursuing friction ridge comparison in addition to, or possibly in lieu of, trace DNA analysis.…”