Währer Jonathan, Kehm Sabrina, Allen Marie, Brauer Linnéa, Eidam Oliver, Seiberle Ilona, Kron Sarah, Scheurer Eva, Schulz Iris
Institute of Forensic Medicine, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Basel, Switzerland.
Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Sweden.
Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2023 May;64:102830. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2023.102830. Epub 2023 Jan 20.
Touch DNA recovery techniques can have limitations, as their effectiveness depends on the substrate on which the DNA of a person of interest can be found. In this study, an in-house dry-vacuuming device, the DNA-Buster, was compared to traditional methods for its DNA recovery performance from items typically examined in forensic casework. The aim was to evaluate whether this dry-vacuuming approach can recover DNA efficiently, potentially complementing the well-established recovery strategies. For this, the performances of swabbing, taping, wet- (M-Vac®) and dry-vacuuming (DNA-Buster) were investigated quantitatively and qualitatively for touch DNA deposited on carpet, cotton sweater, stone, tile and wood. For the sweater, both vacuuming methods outperformed the other collection tools quantitatively. While the highest DNA amounts for the carpet were yielded by swabbing and taping, dry-vacuuming was equally good in reaching full DNA profiles, whereas less complete profiles were observed for the M-Vac®. For stone and tile, swabbing was optimal, whereas dry-vacuuming clearly underperformed for these substrates. Taping was the best recovery method for wood. Despite applying single donor DNA after thoroughly cleaning the items, undesired DNA mixtures were detected for all recovery techniques and all substrates. The overall research findings show first that the novel dry-vacuuming method is suited for DNA recovery from textiles. Secondly, they indicate that more attention should be paid to the substrate-collection dependency to ensure best practices in recovering genetic material in a precise, confident and targeted manner from the variety of forensic casework material.
触摸DNA提取技术可能存在局限性,因为其有效性取决于能够找到目标人物DNA的底物。在本研究中,将一种自制的干式吸尘装置DNA-Buster与传统方法在法医案件工作中常见物品的DNA提取性能方面进行了比较。目的是评估这种干式吸尘方法能否有效地提取DNA,从而可能补充已确立的提取策略。为此,对涂抹法、胶带粘贴法、湿式吸尘法(M-Vac®)和干式吸尘法(DNA-Buster)从地毯、棉质毛衣、石头、瓷砖和木材上沉积的触摸DNA进行了定量和定性研究。对于毛衣,两种吸尘方法在定量方面均优于其他采集工具。地毯上通过涂抹法和胶带粘贴法获得的DNA量最高,干式吸尘法在获得完整的DNA图谱方面同样出色,而M-Vac®观察到的图谱则不太完整。对于石头和瓷砖,涂抹法是最佳方法,而干式吸尘法在这些底物上明显表现不佳。胶带粘贴法是木材的最佳提取方法。尽管在对物品进行彻底清洁后应用了单一供体DNA,但在所有提取技术和所有底物上均检测到了不需要的DNA混合物。总体研究结果首先表明,新型干式吸尘方法适用于从纺织品中提取DNA。其次,它们表明应更加关注底物与采集方法的相关性,以确保从各种法医案件材料中以精确、可靠和有针对性的方式回收遗传物质的最佳实践。