Fox A, Gittos M, Harbison S A, Fleming R, Wivell R
School of Chemical Sciences, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand; Institute of Environmental Science and Research, Private Bag 92021, Auckland 1142, New Zealand.
Auckland Fingerprint Section, New Zealand Police, Private Bag 92002, Auckland, New Zealand.
Sci Justice. 2014 May;54(3):192-8. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2014.01.001. Epub 2014 Feb 9.
Often in the examination of bloodstained fingermarks discussion occurs around whether to prioritise the fingerprint evidence or focus on the biological evidence. Collecting a sample for genetic profiling may result in the loss of ridge detail that could have been used for fingerprint comparison. Fingermark enhancement and recovery methods along with sample collection methods could also compromise downstream genetic analysis. Previous forensic casework has highlighted circumstances where, after enhancement had been performed, it would have been extremely valuable to both identify the body fluid and generate a DNA profile from the same sample. We enhanced depletion series of fingermarks made in blood, using single treatments consisting of aqueous amido black, methanol-based amido black, acid yellow and leucocrystal violet, and exposure to long wave UV light. We then extracted the DNA and RNA for profiling, to assess the recovery and detection of genetic material from the enhanced fingermarks. We have shown that genetic profiling of bloodstained fingermarks can be successful after chemical enhancement; however it may still be necessary to prioritise evidence types in certain circumstances. From our results it appears that even with visible bloodstained fingermarks, leucocrystal violet can reduce the effectiveness of subsequent messenger RNA profiling. Aqueous amido black and acid yellow also have adverse effects on messenger RNA profiling of depleted fingermarks with low levels of cellular material. These results help with forensic decision-making by expanding knowledge of the extent of the detrimental effects of blood-enhancement reagents on both DNA profiling and body fluid identification using messenger RNA profiling.
在检查带血指纹时，常常会围绕是优先考虑指纹证据还是专注于生物证据展开讨论。采集用于基因分型的样本可能会导致丢失原本可用于指纹比对的纹路细节。指纹增强和恢复方法以及样本采集方法也可能会影响后续的基因分析。以往的法医案件工作凸显了这样的情况，即在进行增强处理后，若能从同一样本中既识别出体液又生成DNA图谱，将会非常有价值。我们使用由水性酰胺黑、甲醇基酰胺黑、酸性黄和结晶紫组成的单一处理方法，并让其暴露于长波紫外线下，对血液中形成的指纹损耗系列进行了增强处理。然后我们提取DNA和RNA进行分型，以评估从增强后的指纹中回收和检测遗传物质的情况。我们已经表明，带血指纹经过化学增强后基因分型可以成功；然而在某些情况下可能仍有必要对证据类型进行优先排序。从我们的结果来看，似乎即使是明显带血的指纹，结晶紫也会降低后续信使核糖核酸分型的有效性。水性酰胺黑和酸性黄对细胞物质含量低的损耗指纹的信使核糖核酸分型也有不利影响。这些结果通过扩展对血液增强试剂对DNA分型和使用信使核糖核酸分型进行体液识别的有害影响程度的了解，有助于法医决策。
