Exploration of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) recovery for touch deposits

Burrill, Julia; Kombara, Anju; Daniel, Barbara; Frascione, Nunzianda

doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102431

Cited by 13 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar lysis methods have been reported as beneficial for improving corneocyte DNA recovery from hand rinses [30]. Both cfDNA and corneocyte DNA are likely highly fragmented, and thus, genomic DNA purification methods may limit their recovery [38] (see Supporting Information). Elevated DNA levels from hair keratinocytes and hand rinse cfDNA have been reported using fragment‐targeting recovery methods [49,50].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Touch deposit research frequently overlooks the acellular fraction. However, cell-free (cfDNA) has been reported in body fluids, such as saliva [32], plasma [33][34][35], urine [36,37], sweat [5], and hand rinses [38], and has been recovered from touched objects yielding useful STR alleles [14,39]. It has recently been more widely discussed as a majority contributor to touch DNA [40].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has recently been more widely discussed as a majority contributor to touch DNA [40]. Profiles from cfDNA are often partial, which may result from degradation acquired by postdeposition exposure or may reflect its degraded in vivo condition [5,38,39]. It is unclear whether cfDNA is acquired from the environment or secreted.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both cfDNA and corneocyte DNA are likely highly fragmented, and thus, genomic DNA purification methods may limit their recovery [38] (see Supporting Information). Elevated DNA levels from hair keratinocytes and hand rinse cfDNA have been reported using fragment-targeting recovery methods [49,50]. Consequently, enhanced lysis and fragment-targeting DNA purification beads are used in these studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Accumulation of endogenous and exogenous nucleic acids in “Touch DNA” components on hands

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful forensic DNA profiling from handled items is increasingly routine in casework. This "touch DNA" is thought to contain both cellular and acellular nucleic acid sources. However, there is little clarity on the origins or characteristics of this material. The cellular component consists of anucleate, terminally differentiated corneocytes (assumed to lack DNA), and the occasional nucleated cell. The acellular DNA source is fragmentary, presumably cell breakdown products. This study examines the relative contributions each component makes to the hand-secretions (endogenous) and hand-accumulations (exogenous) by recovering rinses from the inside and outside of worn gloves. Additionally, cellular and acellular DNA was measured at timepoints up to 2 h after hand washing, both with and without interim contact. Microscopic examination confirmed cell morphology and presence of nucleic acids. Following the novel application of a hair keratinocyte lysis method and plasma-DNA fragment purification to hand rinse samples, DNA profiles were generated from both fractions. Exogenous cell-free DNA is shown to be a significant source of touch DNA, which reaccumulates quickly, although its amplifiable nuclear alleles are limited. Endogenous DNA is mostly cellular in origin and provides more allelic information consistently over time.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Accumulation of endogenous and exogenous nucleic acids in “Touch DNA” components on hands

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors also concluded that cell-free DNA forms a major component of the DNA collected from touched deposits, and that tapelifting is not as efficient as swabbing in co-collecting this component of the total DNA deposited. Miller et al [95] and Burrill et al [96] also provided evidence that extracellular DNA can represent a substantial proportion of total DNA recovered from handled substrates. Additionally, Burrill et al [96] determined a suitable technique to separate cellular and cell-free fractions of hand deposits (i.e., one that maintains the representative fraction of cell-free DNA at the time of collection) and the best of three methods tested to purify the cell-free DNA for DNA profiling.…”

Section: Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

DNA Transfer in Forensic Science: Recent Progress towards Meeting Challenges

Oorschot

Meakin

Kokshoorn

et al. 2021

Genes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the factors that may impact the transfer, persistence, prevalence and recovery of DNA (DNA-TPPR), and the availability of data to assign probabilities to DNA quantities and profile types being obtained given particular scenarios and circumstances, is paramount when performing, and giving guidance on, evaluations of DNA findings given activity level propositions (activity level evaluations). In late 2018 and early 2019, three major reviews were published on aspects of DNA-TPPR, with each advocating the need for further research and other actions to support the conduct of DNA-related activity level evaluations. Here, we look at how challenges are being met, primarily by providing a synopsis of DNA-TPPR-related articles published since the conduct of these reviews and briefly exploring some of the actions taken by industry stakeholders towards addressing identified gaps. Much has been carried out in recent years, and efforts continue, to meet the challenges to continually improve the capacity of forensic experts to provide the guidance sought by the judiciary with respect to the transfer of DNA.

show abstract