Secondary DNA transfer by working gloves

The detection of blood, semen and saliva through fabrics: A pilot study

This study aimed to identify if biological material could be detected on the opposite side to deposition on fabric by commonly used presumptive and/or secondary tests. Additionally, this study aimed to ascertain if there is a difference in the DNA quantity and quality from samples obtained from both sides of the same substrate: cotton, polyester, denim, or combined viscose and polyester swatches. Blood, semen, or saliva (25 μL) was deposited on one side of 5 replicates of each fabric type and left for 24 h. Blood swatches were tested using Hemastix® and the ABACard® HemaTrace® immunoassay, semen swatches were tested using acid phosphatase (AP) reagent, the ABACard® p30® immunoassay and hematoxylin and eosin staining, and saliva swatches were tested using Phadebas® paper and the RSID-Saliva™ immunoassay. Both sides of each swatch were separately wet/dry swabbed and subjected to DNA analysis. Blood was able to be detected on the underside of all fabrics using both tests. Semen was able to be detected on the underside of swatches using the presumptive AP test but not p30®, and sperm was rarely observed. Saliva was able to be detected by RSID-Saliva™ but not Phadebas® paper when the underside of swatches were tested. Across all biological materials, DNA was able to be recovered from the top side of all 60 swatches. For the underside, DNA was able to be recovered from 54 swatches. Of the 6 swatches that DNA was unable to be recovered from, one sample was from semen and the rest were from saliva. This study has demonstrated that DNA and components of interest in forensically relevant biological material can be recovered from the opposite side to where it was originally deposited, and that observing biological material and/or DNA on one side of fabric does not definitively indicate direct deposition on that side.

Hungarian legislation regarding implementing a forensic DNA elimination database

The inception of forensic DNA elimination database represents a pivotal advancement in forensic science, aiming to streamline the process of distinguishing between DNA found at crime scenes and that of individuals involved in the investigation process, such as law enforcement personnel and forensic lab staff. In subsequent phases, once familiarity with the database is achieved by its administrators and other stakeholders, and they have accrued sufficient experience, the possibility of expanding the database to encompass first responders-including firefighters, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, and other emergency services personnel-can be contemplated. Key challenges in managing these databases encompass the grounds for collecting samples, ensuring the integrity of both samples and profiles, along with the duration of retention, access to the database, and the protocols to follow when a match is found in the database. This paper outlines the conceptual and detailed legislative framework in Hungary, where the forensic DNA elimination database was introduced in 2022.

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.

An innovative transfer DNA experimental design and qPCR assay to identify primary, secondary, and tertiary DNA transfer

"Touch DNA" is a form of trace DNA that is presumed to be deposited when an individual touches something and leaves behind DNA-containing skin cells, sweat, or other fluids. While touch DNA is often the result of direct contact (i.e., primary transfer), it can also be indirectly transferred between surfaces or individuals (e.g., secondary or tertiary transfer). Even experts cannot distinguish between different types of transfer and do not fully understand which variables affect direct versus indirect transfer or how often each type of transfer occurs. In this study, we utilize an innovative protocol that combines a paired male and female transfer DNA experimental design with an Amelogenin qPCR assay to generate data on primary, secondary, and tertiary DNA transfer. We report frequencies of indirect DNA transfer and also investigate the potential effects of participant age, self-identified ethnicity, and skin conditions on DNA transfer. Out of 22 experimental trials, we detected primary transfer (male + female) in 71% of trials, secondary DNA transfer in 50% of trials, and tertiary DNA transfer in 27% of trials. No significant associations were found between primary DNA transfer and age, self-identified ancestry, or skin conditions, however, all individuals with sloughing skin conditions demonstrated primary DNA transfer and we suggest this variable be explored in larger samples. These results contribute to a better understanding of the conditions under which secondary and tertiary DNA transfer occurs and can be used to propose realistic DNA transfer scenarios in court cases.

Comparison of DNA recovery methods and locations from regularly-worn hooded jumpers before and after use by a second wearer

Items of worn clothing are routinely examined for DNA in forensic casework, commonly with the expectation that at least some of the DNA will come from a wearer of the item, so-called 'wearer DNA'. This study investigated DNA recovered from hooded jumpers that were regularly worn and laundered for four weeks and then subsequently worn by a different individual for four hours. This study also systematically investigated whether using different recovery methods or sampling locations on the jumpers might distinguish between DNA deposited by the regular and most recent wearers of clothing. Four volunteers each wore a new hooded jumper regularly (6 h/day, 2 days/week, washed at weekends) during two 4-week periods. At the end of each month, DNA was first recovered by cutting out and mini-taping the inside left cuff, half-collar, pocket and underarm fabric. The jumpers were then worn by a different individual for four hours, and DNA was again recovered by cutting out and mini-taping, but this time from the inside right cuff, half-collar, pocket and underarm fabric. All DNA samples (n = 128) were quantified and profiled. DNA quantities ranged from 0 to ∼40 ng with an outlier of ∼150 ng, and no significant differences were observed among recovery methods and sampling locations, nor whether one or two wearers had worn the jumpers. However, one volunteer consistently deposited significantly more DNA to their jumpers than two other volunteers, confirming the impact of 'shedder status' on DNA deposition during wearing of clothing. When jumpers were regularly worn by one wearer, the majority (72.7-83.3 %) of the samples for all wearers across both months comprised a major profile of the wearer with a minor profile of non-wearer alleles. When jumpers were then worn by a second wearer, the composition of the profiles obtained were generally reproducible across the recovery methods used, the sampling locations and the two replicates of the experiment for each pairing of wearers. However, profile compositions differed between wearer pairings. Overall, ∼60 % of profiles obtained gave a major profile of the regular wearer, whereas ∼30 % gave a major profile of the second wearer. The remaining profiles comprised other much less frequent observations of single-source profiles of each wearer and equal proportions of DNA from both wearers. Non-wearer DNA was also observed in the majority of samples, both before and after jumpers were worn by a second wearer. For one volunteer's jumpers, a recurring non-wearer DNA profile was observed that could be attributed to their romantic partner, and this DNA persisted on the jumpers even after being worn by the second wearer. This study provides insight on the impact of shedder status, multiple wearers, different recovery methods and sampling locations on the quantities of DNA and compositions of DNA profiles recovered from authentically regularly-worn hooded jumpers. The findings also provide a preliminary dataset that can be used to infer activity level probabilities in casework.

Disposable gloves: An innate source of transferable chemical residues

As workers in medicine, food science, and advanced manufacturing have learned, pristine disposable gloves are an innate source of chemical contamination from the moment they are first donned. Given the typically low extent of chemical contamination on the surface of gloves post-manufacture, many fields overlook, or simply discount, this source of transferable chemical evidence. However, forensic science should not adopt this approach. Instead, the trace chemical signatures left after handling objects while wearing different brands and types of disposable gloves could provide new avenues of forensic intelligence when assessing crime scenes. Similarly, an appreciation of the potential for disposable gloves to transfer innate chemical residues is an important consideration when surface analyses of evidence are envisioned. This review summarises past reports of chemical transference originating from pristine gloves drawn from the fields of medicine, food science, and material science, as well as the few examples highlighting the implications of such events for forensic investigations. Correlations between the chemical identities of the contaminants and the material of glove manufacture are provided here where known, with energy-intensive chemical extraction of glove material, and passive transference of chemical residues through simple contact, both explored. Finally, discussions pertaining to the implications of disposable glove residues, coupled with opportunities for future research, are outlined.

Indirect DNA Transfer and Forensic Implications: A Literature Review

Progress in DNA profiling techniques has made it possible to detect even the minimum amount of DNA at a crime scene (i.e., a complete DNA profile can be produced using as little as 100 pg of DNA, equivalent to only 15-20 human cells), leading to new defense strategies. While the evidence of a DNA trace is seldom challenged in court by a defendant's legal team, concerns are often raised about how the DNA was transferred to the location of the crime. This review aims to provide an up-to-date overview of the experimental work carried out focusing on indirect DNA transfer, analyzing each selected paper, the experimental method, the sampling technique, the extraction protocol, and the main results. Scopus and Web of Science databases were used as the search engines, including 49 papers. Based on the results of this review, one of the factors that influence secondary transfer is the amount of DNA shed by different individuals. Another factor is the type and duration of contact between individuals or objects (generally, more intimate or prolonged contact results in more DNA transfer). A third factor is the nature and quality of the DNA source. However, there are exceptions and variations depending on individual characteristics and environmental conditions. Considering that secondary transfer depends on multiple factors that interact with each other in unpredictable ways, it should be considered a complex and dynamic phenomenon that can affect forensic investigation in various ways, for example, placing a subject at a crime scene who has never been there. Correct methods and protocols are required to detect and prevent secondary transfer from compromising forensic evidence, as well as the correct interpretation through Bayesian networks. In this context, the definition of well-designed experimental studies combined with the use of new forensic techniques could improve our knowledge in this challenging field, reinforcing the value of DNA evidence in criminal trials.

DNA transfer when using gloves in burglary simulations

Several studies have demonstrated that DNA can be indirectly transferred from an individual onto a surface. Therefore, the presence of DNA that is compatible with a given person does not necessarily mean that this person has touched the surface on which the DNA was recovered. The present work simulates cases, where DNA is recovered on a door handle and compared to several reference DNA profiles. The DNA profile of the trace shares DNA components with a person of interest (POI). When asked about the DNA results, the POI says he has nothing to do with the incident and has never been at the scene. However, a possibility would be that the DNA came from his recently stolen gloves. Someone else, the alternative offender (AO), could have opened the door wearing his gloves (POI's gloves), and transferred his DNA (POI's DNA). Based on the above-mentioned scenario, 60 burglary simulations experiments were carried out to generate data to assess DNA results given these allegations. The quantity and quality of DNA profiles (NGM SElect) recovered when the POI opened/closed the door bare-handed or when someone else performed the same activity but using POI's gloves, were compared. The gloves were regularly worn during at least three months by their owner during the winter. On the contrary, the AO wore them only for two minutes. Among the traces collected on the door handles, less than 50% of the traces led to interpretable DNA profiles. In 30% of the cases (3/10), when the door was opened/closed with bare hands, the DNA found on the door handle led to a mixed DNA profile with the POI's DNA aligning with the major contributor. For the experiments where the AO opened/closed the door with the POI's gloves, the POI's DNA was compatible with 22% (11/50) of the mixed DNA profile, aligning with the major in 8% of the cases (4/50). The DNA profiles of the offices' occupants were observed on the door handles, but not the AO's. In addition to the results of the experiments, we show two examples of how one can assess results observed in casework. Given the possibility of indirect transfer of minute DNA quantities, this research emphasizes the need to evaluate DNA results given the activities when the POI has a legitimate reason that can explain the presence of their DNA.

The potential for investigator-mediated contamination to occur during routine search activities

The sensitivity and discrimination power of modern DNA profiling systems means that very small amounts of DNA from an individual can be detected on an item leading to large inclusionary statistics for that person. The sensitivity of these systems has significant benefits in the investigation of crime but also can be highly sensitive to contamination of exhibits or crime scenes. It becomes critical to distinguish between deposition during commission of a crime or deposition via some other method unrelated to the crime. This study investigates methodologies used in crime scene examination and the potential for them to cause non-crime-related transfer of DNA. Factors assessed include the source of DNA, the handling time, the amount of movement during contact, and the substrate type. The amount of movement and the number of transfer steps are the most critical in determining whether, and how much, DNA is transferred. This study provides information for crime scene examiners and also scientists assessing transfer scenarios.

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.

DNA Transfer in Forensic Science: Recent Progress towards Meeting Challenges

Understanding the factors that may impact the transfer, persistence, prevalence and recovery of DNA (DNA-TPPR), and the availability of data to assign probabilities to DNA quantities and profile types being obtained given particular scenarios and circumstances, is paramount when performing, and giving guidance on, evaluations of DNA findings given activity level propositions (activity level evaluations). In late 2018 and early 2019, three major reviews were published on aspects of DNA-TPPR, with each advocating the need for further research and other actions to support the conduct of DNA-related activity level evaluations. Here, we look at how challenges are being met, primarily by providing a synopsis of DNA-TPPR-related articles published since the conduct of these reviews and briefly exploring some of the actions taken by industry stakeholders towards addressing identified gaps. Much has been carried out in recent years, and efforts continue, to meet the challenges to continually improve the capacity of forensic experts to provide the guidance sought by the judiciary with respect to the transfer of DNA.

"I've never been at the crime scene!" - gloves as carriers for secondary DNA transfer

Over recent years, DNA profiling techniques have become highly sensitive. Even small amounts of DNA at crime scenes can be analysed leading to new defence strategies. At court, defence lawyers rarely question the existence of a DNA trace (source level) but challenge how the DNA was transferred to the scene (activity level). Nowadays, the most common defence strategy is to claim that somebody else had stolen the defendant's gloves and used them while breaking and entering. In this study we tested this statement. Using gloves made of different material (cloth, leather, rubber) and varying secondary transfer surfaces (wood, metal, glass), we simulated a few of the most likely transfer scenarios that occur during breaking and entering. While we detected the presence of DNA on the outside of 92 of the 98 gloves tested, we observed only one case of secondary transfer in a total of 81 transfer experiments. This data demonstrates that secondary transfer under conditions resembling realistic conditions is a very rare event.

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

Since the first shedder test was formulated almost 20 years ago, a plethora of different test strategies has emerged. The amount of data generated so far is considerable. However, because of the limited reproducibility of its results, the reliability of the shedder concept is frequently questioned. This study provides a literature overview of applied shedder tests that capture the diversity of the concept. It is pointed out to what extent different classification criteria, workflows, and trace evaluation can impair the classification outcome. The robustness of shedder status was assessed by applying a promising approach established by Fonneløp et al. (Forensic Sci Int Genet 29:48-60, 21). Data provide similar results to those in recent studies but also ambiguous shedder classifications. The applied shedder test was adapted based on our own as well as the reviewed data. With novel classification parameters, promising results were achieved. This study reveals uncertainties and inconsistencies of the shedder concept. Recommendations for harmonization and transparency are proposed. Implementation of the recommendations may result in an increased impact on casework and transfer studies, including activity-level assessments. Furthermore, this study shows that moisturizers affect participants' shedder status as well as DNA transfer. The impact appears to remain relevant even 60 min post ointment application but depends greatly on the type of moisturizer applied.

DNA transfer to firearms in alternative realistic handling scenarios

Firearms are the most relevant items of evidence in gun-related crimes, likely bearing various traces facilitating an objective reconstruction of the crime. Trace DNA recovered from firearm surfaces might help to identify individual(s) having handled the firearm and thereby possibly to link the firearm and the corresponding shooter, however, the interpretation of DNA traces on handled items can be challenging and requires a detailed understanding of various factors impacting DNA prevalence, transfer, persistence and recovery. Herein, we aimed at improving our understanding of factors affecting the variability of trace DNA characteristics recovered from firearms handled in gun-related crimes: Skin contact traces were recovered from various outer surfaces of two types of firearms handled in four realistic, casework-relevant handling scenarios and the corresponding trace characteristics (DNA yield, number of contributors, relative profile contribution for known and unknown contributors, LRs) were compared. Trace DNA characteristics differed distinctly between handling conditions, firearm and surface types as well as handling individuals and intraindividual deposits emphasizing the variability and complexity of trace DNA profile composition expected to be recovered from firearms after realistic handling scenarios. The obtained results can provide useful insights for forensic experts evaluating alternative activity level propositions in gun-related crimes.