Unintentional effects of cleaning a crime scene—when the sponge becomes an accomplice in DNA transfer

Helmus, Janine; Pfeifer, Manuel; Feiner, Laura-Kim; Krause, Laura Jasmin; Bajanowski, Thomas; Poetsch, Micaela

doi:10.1007/s00414-018-1983-5

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1). These observations support the recent findings that wiping an object can redistribute DNA and that chloric 4 agents tend to render surfaces DNA-free [5]. Non-chloric cleaning agents appeared to have a larger effect on DNA persistence in the experiments described herein than observed by Helmus et al [5], which could be due to differences in cleaning methods, use of smaller quantities of DNA and/or the use of acellular DNA; these variables need to be investigated further.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Not limited to DNA evidence, perpetrators can remove traces through various ways such as through fires [1], use of bleach [2], painting over stains [3] or rubbing away of fingermarks. Washing of body fluid stained clothes has also been shown to reduce DNA persistence to varying degrees (as reviewed by van Oorschot et al 2019 [4]) and rubbing an item during cleaning can transfer DNA to other parts of the item [5]. Here, we investigate the effects of various cleaning methods on DNA persistence on commonly encountered casework exhibits, specifically knives and mugs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effects of various household cleaning methods on DNA persistence on mugs and knives

Li¹,

Toogood²,

Ryan³

et al. 2019

Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the prevalence of forensic science in popular media, offenders are becoming more forensically aware and can employ precautionary methods, such as cleaning used items or rubbing away fingermarks, to reduce their traces left at a crime scene.This study examined the effects of various cleaning methods on DNA persistence on commonly encountered casework exhibits, specifically knives and mugs. Aliquots of acellular DNA were added to the knife handles or mug rims, allowed to dry, and then the substrates were either sampled directly or were cleaned and then sampled. The plastic-and wood-handled knives were cleaned with a cloth in a sink of water, diluted dish washing liquid or diluted household bleach, whereas the ceramic, glass and steel mugs were cleaned with a dry or wet cloth, or by wiping with a cloth after applying a cleaning product (dish washing liquid or household bleach spray) directly into the mug and then rinsing it with water. DNA samples were collected with wet and dry swabs, in triplicate, and extracted and quantified. In both experiments, DNA was not detected on items after cleaning with dish washing liquid or household bleach, irrespective of the differences in amounts of DNA initially deposited, substrates, and cleaning methods. Even without a cleaning product, rubbing with a dry cloth decreased DNA recovery from the mugs, regardless of the mug substrate. These results contribute to our understanding of the impact of various cleaning methods on DNA recovery at the crime scene and will help inform DNA recovery strategies.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

The effects of various household cleaning methods on DNA persistence on mugs and knives

Li¹,

Toogood²,

Ryan³

et al. 2019

Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, these surfaces could be cleaned up to 3–4 times per day compared to, for instance, the handles of office doors (once daily), the bathroom tap handle and plastic soap dispenser (once daily to once weekly). We anticipated that the increased cleaning frequency would affect touch DNA transfer, persistence, and recovery in this scenario, given that wiping can remove or redistribute biomaterial on surfaces [ 17 ] and cleaning agents may render surfaces DNA-free [ 18 ]. In contrast to our previous work, where metal and plastic surfaces were pre-sterilized, and a known amount of acellular DNA applied, the surfaces utilized in this study were uncontrolled to mimic real-life scenarios.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Isohelix™ and Rayon swabbing systems for touch DNA recovery from metal surfaces

Bonsu

Rodie

Higgins

et al. 2021

Forensic Sci Med Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A previous study evaluating two swabbing systems found that DNA was best recovered from sterile metal substrates using an Isohelix™ swab wetted with isopropyl alcohol rather than a Rayon swab with water as the wetting agent. We tested the same swabbing systems on metal (aluminum, brass, and stainless steel) and plastic substrates in a regularly touched environment to simulate the non-deliberate transfer of touch evidence likely seen in a casework scenario, to ascertain the performance of these swabs in an uncontrolled situation. Higher amounts of touch DNA were recovered with Isohelix™ swabs (0.5 – 3.3 ng) compared to Rayon swabs (0.13 – 1.2 ng). The Isohelix™ swabbing system was found to significantly recover more touch DNA (p = 0.04) from the metal substrates than the Rayon swabbing system, consistent with the findings of our previous work. The results contribute to our understanding of the impact of sample collection techniques on touch DNA recovery from problematic metal surfaces and suggest that supplemental cleaning of substrates as a precautionary step against the spread of infections may affect touch DNA persistence and the recovery efficiency of swabs. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12024-021-00423-8.

show abstract

“…Reither et al [146] found that domestic cleaning methods (e.g., vacuuming, mopping with cleaning agents that did not contain cholic acid) had limited impact on the quantity of DNA recovered from various types of flooring (e.g., carpet, tiles), but often altered the DNA profile composition of the samples collected when comparing the profile from the post-cleaned area with the profile from the corresponding pre-cleaned area. Similarly, in experiments to determine the impact of a range of cleaning agents and cleaning actions using DNA-free towel pieces and sponges on small blood stains, saliva stains and fingermarks on plastic table tops and fabric surfaces, Helmus et al [147] found that the DNA was redistributed to other areas of the item by the cleaning action. They also found that the cleaning agent had little impact on the ability to generate DNA profiles of the sample collected, with the exception of chloric agents, which the authors asserted rendered almost everything DNA-free.…”

Section: Prevalence and Backgroundmentioning

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

Unintentional effects of cleaning a crime scene—when the sponge becomes an accomplice in DNA transfer

Cited by 14 publications

References 32 publications

The effects of various household cleaning methods on DNA persistence on mugs and knives

The effects of various household cleaning methods on DNA persistence on mugs and knives

Comparison of Isohelix™ and Rayon swabbing systems for touch DNA recovery from metal surfaces

DNA Transfer in Forensic Science: Recent Progress towards Meeting Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About