Trace DNA Sampling Success from Evidence Items Commonly Encountered in Forensic Casework

Trace DNA analysis is a significant part of a forensic laboratory's workload. Knowing optimal sampling strategies and item success rates for particular item types can assist in evidence selection and examination processes and shorten turnaround times. In this study, forensic short tandem repeat (STR) casework results were reviewed to determine how often STR profiles suitable for comparison were obtained from “handler” and “wearer” areas of 764 items commonly submitted for examination. One hundred and fifty‐five (155) items obtained from volunteers were also sampled. Items were analyzed for best sampling location and strategy. For casework items, headwear and gloves provided the highest success rates. Experimentally, eyeglasses and earphones, T‐shirts, fabric gloves and watches provided the highest success rates. Eyeglasses and latex gloves provided optimal results if the entire surfaces were swabbed. In general, at least 10%, and up to 88% of all trace DNA analyses resulted in suitable STR profiles for comparison.

[1]  Roland A H van Oorschot,et al.  Persistence of DNA deposited by the original user on objects after subsequent use by a second person. , 2014, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[2]  D. Foran,et al.  The Influence of Swabbing Solutions on DNA Recovery from Touch Samples , , 2013, Journal of forensic sciences.

[3]  Patrice Mangin,et al.  DNA profiling success and relevance of 1739 contact stains from caseworks , 2008 .

[4]  B C M Pang,et al.  Double swab technique for collecting touched evidence. , 2007, Legal medicine.

[5]  R. Frappier,et al.  Developmental validation of a real-time quantitative PCR assay for automated quantification of human DNA. , 2003, Journal of forensic sciences.

[6]  Ricky Ansell,et al.  Success rates of a forensic tape-lift method for DNA recovery , 2010 .

[7]  Christianne J. Poot,et al.  Knowledge on DNA Success Rates to Optimize the DNA Analysis Process: From Crime Scene to Laboratory , 2016, Journal of forensic sciences.

[8]  Claude Roux,et al.  Trace DNA analysis: do you know what your neighbour is doing? A multi-jurisdictional survey. , 2008, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[9]  O. Hansson,et al.  Trace DNA collection—Performance of minitape and three different swabs , 2009 .

[10]  SallyAnn Harbison,et al.  An analysis of the success rate of 908 trace DNA samples submitted to the Crime Sample Database Unit in New Zealand , 2008 .

[11]  Roland A H van Oorschot,et al.  The influence of substrate on DNA transfer and extraction efficiency. , 2013, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[12]  S. Walsh,et al.  Trace DNA success rates relating to volume crime offences , 2009 .

[13]  Paul Brauner,et al.  The Use of Adhesive Tape for Recovery of DNA from Crime Scene Items , 2010, Journal of forensic sciences.