The diversity of shedder tests and a novel factor that affects DNA transfer

Trace DNA and its persistence on various surfaces: A long term study investigating the influence of surface type and environmental conditions - Part one, metals

It is imperative for proper evidence triage that forensic biologists understand what kind of results to expect from certain evidence types submitted for DNA analysis. The persistence of trace DNA has been insufficiently investigated and there is little data available pertaining to the persistence of DNA in different environmental conditions and on different materials. The goal of this study is to increase the available data on this topic which would, in turn, help forensic biologists manage expectations when submitting specific evidence types for DNA testing. The work presented herein is a large-scale persistence project aimed to identify trends in the persistence of trace DNA and indicate how different environmental storage conditions and target surface characteristics influence the persistence of cellular and cell free DNA (cfDNA) over time. To eliminate variation within the experiment we used a proxy DNA deposit consisting of a synthetic fingerprint solution, cellular DNA, and/or cfDNA. Samples were collected and analysed from 7 metals over the course of 1 year (27 time points) under 3 different environmental storage conditions. The results of this experiment show that metal type greatly influences DNA persistence. For instance, copper exhibited an expected poor DNA persistence (up to 4 h) which a purification step did not help increase the DNA yield. Alternatively, DNA can persist for up to a year on lead at levels potentially high enough to allow for forensic DNA testing. Additionally, this study showed that the sample storage environment had no impact on DNA persistence in most cases. When considering DNA type, cfDNA was shown to persist for longer than cellular DNA and persistence as a whole appears to be better when DNA is deposited as mixtures over when deposited alone. Unsurprisingly, it can be expected that DNA recovery rates from trace deposits will decrease over time. However, DNA decay is highly dependent on the metal surface and extremely variable at short time points but slightly less variable as time since deposition increases. This data is intended to add to our understanding of DNA persistence and the factors which affect it.

The impact of substrate characteristics on the collection and persistence of biological materials, and their implications for forensic casework

This study assessed the level of nucleic acid persistence on the substrate pre-, and post-swabbing, in order to assess whether biological materials (touch, saliva, semen, and blood) are collected differently depending on the substrate characteristics. A total of 48 samples per deposit and substrate variety (n = 384) were assessed by tracking the persistence of nucleic acid using Diamond™ Nucleic Acid Dye (DD) staining and Polilight photography. The number of DD nucleic acid fluorescent complexes formed post-staining were counted (fluorescent count) and in conjunction with the fluorescence signal intensity (DD nucleic acid complex accumulation) used to estimate the level of nucleic acid persistence on substrates. Touch deposits have shown to be the most persistent deposit with strong adhesion capabilities on both substrate verities. Saliva displayed a higher persistence than semen and/or blood. Semen displayed a high collection efficiency as well as a high fluorescence signal intensity. Blood displayed a low persistence on both substrates with a superior collection efficiency that may also indicate a higher probability to become dislodged from surfaces given a particular activity. Our research has shown that the persistence and recovery of biological deposits is not only measurable but more importantly, may have the potential to be estimated, as such, may build an understanding that can provide valuable guidance for collection efficiency evaluations, and the assessing of the probability of particular profiles, given alternate propositions of means of transfer occurring.

Assessing the consistency of shedder status under various experimental conditions

Shedder status is defined as the propensity of an individual to leave DNA behind on touched items or surfaces and has been suggested as one of the major factors influencing DNA transfer. However, little is known about whether shedder status is a constant property of an individual across multiple measurements or when the environmental conditions are changed. We have assessed DNA depositions of six males on 20 occasions to acquire a reference data set and to classify the participants into high, intermediate, or low shedders. This data set was also used to investigate how the probability of a correct shedder status classification changed when the number of DNA deposition measurements increased. Individual sweat rates were measured with a VapoMeter and data regarding hygiene routines were collected through a questionnaire on each sampling occasion. Next, we investigated how changes in the experimental conditions such as seasonal variation, hygiene routines, the temperature of the touched object, and repeated handling of an object influenced the DNA shedding. Additionally, we assessed DNA collected from the face and from T-shirts worn by the six participants to explore whether shedder status may be associated with the relative amount of DNA obtained from other body parts. Our results indicate that shedder status is a stable property across different seasons and different temperatures of handled objects. The relative DNA amounts obtained from repeatedly handled tubes, worn T-shirts, and from faces reflected the shedder status of the participants. We suggest that an individual's shedder status is highly influenced by the DNA levels on other body parts than hands, accumulating on the palms by frequently touching e.g., the face or previously handled items harboring self-DNA. Assessing physiological differences between the participants revealed that there were no associations between DNA shedding and individual sweat rates.

Trace DNA Transfer in Co-Working Spaces: The Importance of Background DNA Analysis

The presence of background DNA (bgDNA) can hinder the evaluation of DNA evidence at the activity level, especially when the suspect is expected to be retrieved due to their habitual occupation of the investigated environment. Based on real-life casework circumstances, this study investigates the prevalence, composition, origin, and probable transfer routes of bgDNA found on personal items in situations where their owner and person of interest (POI) share the same workspace. Baseline values of bgDNA were evaluated on the participants' personal items. Secondary and higher degree transfer scenarios of non-self DNA deposition were also investigated. The DNA from co-workers and co-inhabiting partners can be recovered from an individual's personal belongings. Non-self DNA present on the hands and deposited on a sterile surface can generate uninformative profiles. The accumulation of foreign DNA on surfaces over time appears to be crucial for the recovery of comparable profiles, resulting in detectable further transfer onto other surfaces. For a thorough evaluation of touch DNA traces at the activity level, it is necessary to collect information not only about DNA transfer probabilities but also about the presence of the POI as part of the 'baseline' bgDNA of the substrates involved.

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

This review paper covers the forensic-relevant literature in biological sciences from 2019 to 2022 as a part of the 20th INTERPOL International Forensic Science Managers Symposium. Topics reviewed include rapid DNA testing, using law enforcement DNA databases plus investigative genetic genealogy DNA databases along with privacy/ethical issues, forensic biology and body fluid identification, DNA extraction and typing methods, mixture interpretation involving probabilistic genotyping software (PGS), DNA transfer and activity-level evaluations, next-generation sequencing (NGS), DNA phenotyping, lineage markers (Y-chromosome, mitochondrial DNA, X-chromosome), new markers and approaches (microhaplotypes, proteomics, and microbial DNA), kinship analysis and human identification with disaster victim identification (DVI), and non-human DNA testing including wildlife forensics. Available books and review articles are summarized as well as 70 guidance documents to assist in quality control that were published in the past three years by various groups within the United States and around the world.

Touch DNA Sampling Methods: Efficacy Evaluation and Systematic Review

Collection and interpretation of "touch DNA" from crime scenes represent crucial steps during criminal investigations, with clear consequences in courtrooms. Although the main aspects of this type of evidence have been extensively studied, some controversial issues remain. For instance, there is no conclusive evidence indicating which sampling method results in the highest rate of biological material recovery. Thus, this study aimed to describe the actual considerations on touch DNA and to compare three different sampling procedures, which were "single-swab", "double-swab", and "other methods" (i.e., cutting out, adhesive tape, FTA® paper scraping), based on the experimental results published in the recent literature. The data analysis performed shows the higher efficiency of the single-swab method in DNA recovery in a wide variety of experimental settings. On the contrary, the double-swab technique and other methods do not seem to improve recovery rates. Despite the apparent discrepancy with previous research, these results underline certain limitations inherent to the sampling procedures investigated. The application of this information to forensic investigations and laboratories could improve operative standard procedures and enhance this almost fundamental investigative tool's probative value.

Who Packed the Drugs? Application of Bayesian Networks to Address Questions of DNA Transfer, Persistence, and Recovery from Plastic Bags and Tape

When DNA from a suspect is detected in a sample collected at a crime scene, there can be alternative explanations about the activity that may have led to the transfer, persistence and recovery of his/her DNA. Previous studies have shown that DNA can be indirectly transferred via intermediate surfaces and that DNA on a previously used object can persist after subsequent use of another individual. In addition, it has been shown that a person’s shedder status may influence transfer, persistence, prevalence, and recovery of DNA. In this study we have investigated transfer persistence and recovery on zip-lock bags and tape, which are commonly encountered in drug cases and how the shedder status of the participants influenced the results. A probabilistic framework was developed which was based on a previously described Bayesian network with case-specific modifications. Continuous modelling of data was used to inform the Bayesian networks and two case scenarios were investigated. In the specific scenarios only moderate to low support for H_p was obtained. Applying a continuous model based on the profile quality can change the LRs.

Casework-related DNA transfer on footwear in consideration of the shedder status

DNA evidence on shoes can play an important role in solving a variety of crimes. We investigated the transfer, persistence, prevalence and recovery of DNA (DNAtppr) on shoes (sneakers) and their soles in realistic handling scenarios taking into account the shedder status. This study aims to increase the understanding of the expected composition of DNA profiles and their probative value, providing a basis for activity level assessments. Samples were analyzed using a direct lysis method, suggesting its versatility and increasing the DNA typing success compared to previous studies on footwear. The data showed surface-dependent background DNA (bDNA) levels on shoe soles and prevalence of bDNA on the upper parts of the shoe. The owner of the shoe was allocatable to the mixture for almost every shoe and sampling location. Alternating scenarios of shoe handling were simulated through different pairs of shedders to distinguish shoe owner and subsequent user. Secondary users were attributable to DNA mixtures regardless of shedder status after wearing shoes a single time. The influence of the shedder status follows specific trends in this context. However, particularly intermediate shedders show inconsistent results. The prevalence of bDNA appears to have a greater effect on the impact of the shedder status on DNA profile composition than previously reported. The data help researchers to better resolve suspect statements and determine if a person of interest wore the shoes relevant to the investigation.

Individual shedder status and the origin of touch DNA

Due to improved laboratory techniques, touched surfaces and items are increasingly employed as sources of forensic DNA evidence. This has urged a need to better understand the mechanisms of DNA transfer between individuals. Shedder status (i.e. the propensity to leave DNA behind) has been identified as one major factor regulating DNA transfer. It is known that some individuals tend to shed more DNA than others, but the mechanisms behind shedder status are largely unknown. By comparing the amounts of DNA deposited from active hands (i.e. used "as usual") and inactive hands (i.e. not allowed to touch anything), we show that some of the self-DNA deposited from hands is likely to have accumulated on hands from other parts of the body or previously handled items (active hands: 2.1 ± 2.7 ng, inactive hands: 0.83 ± 1.1 ng, paired t-test: p = 0.014, n = 27 pairs of hands). Further investigation showed that individual levels of deposited DNA are highly associated with the level of DNA accumulation on the skin of the face (Pearson's correlation: r = 0.90, p < 0.00001 and Spearman's ranked correlation: r_s = 0.56, p = 0.0016, n = 29). We hypothesized that individual differences in sebum secretion levels could influence the amount of DNA accumulation in facial areas, but no such correlation was seen (Pearson's correlation: r = - 0.13, p = 0.66, n = 14). Neither was there any correlation between DNA levels on hands or forehead and the time since hand or face wash. We propose that the amount of self-DNA deposited from hands is highly influenced by the individual levels of accumulated facial DNA, and that cells/DNA is often transferred to hands by touching or rubbing one's face.