Persistence of touch DNA on commonly encountered substrates in different storage conditions

Kaesler, Todd; Kirkbride, K. Paul; Linacre, Adrian

doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2023.111728

Cited by 10 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Touch DNA persistence depends on the material that has been deposited. The latest research reports that in outdoor conditions, DNA survived the longest on fabric (9 months) and shorter on steel and rubber (6 and 3 months, respectively) [ 114 ].…”

Section: Degradation Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nucleic Acids Persistence—Benefits and Limitations in Forensic Genetics

Żarczyńska,

Żarczyński,

Tomsia

2023

Genes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The analysis of genetic material may be the only way to identify an unknown person or solve a criminal case. Often, the conditions in which the genetic material was found determine the choice of the analytical method. Hence, it is extremely important to understand the influence of various factors, both external and internal, on genetic material. The review presents information on DNA and RNA persistence, depending on the chemical and physical factors affecting the genetic material integrity. One of the factors taken into account is the time elapsing to genetic material recovery. Temperature can both preserve the genetic material or lead to its rapid degradation. Radiation, aquatic environments, and various types of chemical and physical factors also affect the genetic material quality. The substances used during the forensic process, i.e., for biological trace visualization or maceration, are also discussed. Proper analysis of genetic material degradation can help determine the post-mortem interval (PMI) or time since deposition (TsD), which may play a key role in criminal cases.

show abstract

Section: Degradation Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nucleic Acids Persistence—Benefits and Limitations in Forensic Genetics

Żarczyńska,

Żarczyński,

Tomsia

2023

Genes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Touch DNA, which refers to a loss of biological material transferred from a donor to an object or another person during physical contact 1 – 3 , is a real challenge for officers who have to collect it using a best assumption. These biological traces are invisible to the naked eye, cannot be detected using the usual tools (polychromatic lights like Polilight®, or chemiluminescence like Luminol/Bluestar®), and consequently may be poorly collected, even though they represent the majority of traces analyzed in forensic laboratories 4 . The composition of touch DNA is still not clearly defined in the literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The substrate-dependent trace may also persist differently. Kaelser et al 4 showed that substrates (textured rubber, untreated mild-steel tubing, cotton fabric) stored in a standard laboratory environment allowed touch DNA to persist for at least 9 months. On the other hand, when surfaces are outdoors, the persistence of touch DNA varies 4 according to the type of substrate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of invisible biological traces in relation to the physicochemical properties of substrates surfaces in forensic casework

Recipon,

Agniel,

Kunemann

et al. 2024

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Touch DNA, which can be found at crime scenes, consists of invisible biological traces deposited through a person’s skin’s contact with an object or another person. Many factors influence touch DNA transfer, including the “destination” substrate’s surface. The latter’s physicochemical characteristics (wettability, roughness, surface energy, etc.) will impact touch DNA deposition and persistence on a substrate. We selected a representative panel of substrates from objects found at crime scenes (glass, polystyrene, tiles, raw wood, etc.) to investigate the impact of these characteristics on touch DNA deposition and detection. These were shown to impact cell deposition, morphology, retention, and subsequent touch DNA genetic analysis. Interestingly, cell-derived fragments found within keratinocyte cells and fingermarks using in vitro touch DNA models could be successfully detected whichever the substrates’ physicochemistry by targeting cellular proteins and carbohydrates for two months, indoors and outdoors. However, swabbing and genetic analyses of such mock traces from different substrates produced informative profiles mainly for substrates with the highest surface free energy and therefore the most hydrophilic. The substrates’ intrinsic characteristics need to be considered to better understand both the transfer and persistence of biological traces, as well as their detection and collection, which require an appropriate methodology and sampling device to get informative genetic profiles.

show abstract