Literature DB >> 23278347

The influence of swabbing solutions on DNA recovery from touch samples.

Sarah M Thomasma1, David R Foran.   

Abstract

There has been minimal research into how to best obtain DNA from touch samples. Many forensic laboratories simply moisten a swab with water and use it for collecting cells/DNA from evidentiary samples. However, this and other methods have not been objectively studied in order to maximize DNA yields. In this study, fingerprints were collected using swabs moistened with water or laboratory or commercially available detergents, including sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), Triton X-100, Tween 20, Formula 409(®) , and Simple Green(®) . Prints were swabbed, DNA isolated using an organic extraction, yields quantified, and relative yields compared. In all cases, the detergent-based swabbing solutions outperformed water, with SDS and Triton X-100 producing significant increases in yield. Short tandem repeat profiles were consistent with the individuals that placed them. Subsequent analysis of SDS concentrations for collecting touch DNA demonstrated an increase in DNA yield with increasing SDS concentration, with an optimal concentration of approximately 2%.
© 2012 American Academy of Forensic Sciences.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DNA typing/collection; double swabbing; forensic science; low copy number DNA; quantifiler; short tandem repeats; sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS); touch DNA

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23278347     DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.12036

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Forensic Sci        ISSN: 0022-1198            Impact factor:   1.832


  7 in total

1.  Evaluation of the efficiency of Isohelix™ and Rayon swabs for recovery of DNA from metal surfaces.

Authors:  Dan O M Bonsu; Denice Higgins; Julianne Henry; Jeremy J Austin
Journal:  Forensic Sci Med Pathol       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 2.007

2.  Evaluation of the Effects of Different Sample Collection Strategies on DNA/RNA Co-Analysis of Forensic Stains.

Authors:  Daniela Lacerenza; Giorgio Caudullo; Elena Chierto; Serena Aneli; Giancarlo Di Vella; Marco Barberis; Samuele Voyron; Paola Berchialla; Carlo Robino
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-30       Impact factor: 4.141

3.  Evidence Collection and Analysis for Touch Deoxyribonucleic Acid in Groping and Sexual Assault Cases.

Authors:  Julie L Valentine; Paige Presler-Jur; Heather Mills; Suzanne Miles
Journal:  J Forensic Nurs       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 1.175

4.  Evaluation of methods to improve the extraction and recovery of DNA from cotton swabs for forensic analysis.

Authors:  Michael S Adamowicz; Dominique M Stasulli; Emily M Sobestanovich; Todd W Bille
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-30       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Rapid DNA analysis for automated processing and interpretation of low DNA content samples.

Authors:  Rosemary S Turingan; Sameer Vasantgadkar; Luke Palombo; Catherine Hogan; Hua Jiang; Eugene Tan; Richard F Selden
Journal:  Investig Genet       Date:  2016-03-17

6.  Utilizing Moist or Dry Swabs for the Sampling of Nasal MRSA Carriers? An In Vivo and In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Philipp Warnke; Annette Devide; Mirjam Weise; Hagen Frickmann; Norbert Georg Schwarz; Holger Schäffler; Peter Ottl; Andreas Podbielski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Touch DNA in forensic science: The use of laboratory-created eccrine fingerprints to quantify DNA loss.

Authors:  Jessica Tang; Jennifer Ostrander; Ray Wickenheiser; Ashley Hall
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 2.395

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.