Combined DNA Typing and Protein Identification from Unfired Brass Cartridges,,,

Recent advances in forensic biology and forensic DNA typing: INTERPOL review 2019-2022

This review paper covers the forensic-relevant literature in biological sciences from 2019 to 2022 as a part of the 20th INTERPOL International Forensic Science Managers Symposium. Topics reviewed include rapid DNA testing, using law enforcement DNA databases plus investigative genetic genealogy DNA databases along with privacy/ethical issues, forensic biology and body fluid identification, DNA extraction and typing methods, mixture interpretation involving probabilistic genotyping software (PGS), DNA transfer and activity-level evaluations, next-generation sequencing (NGS), DNA phenotyping, lineage markers (Y-chromosome, mitochondrial DNA, X-chromosome), new markers and approaches (microhaplotypes, proteomics, and microbial DNA), kinship analysis and human identification with disaster victim identification (DVI), and non-human DNA testing including wildlife forensics. Available books and review articles are summarized as well as 70 guidance documents to assist in quality control that were published in the past three years by various groups within the United States and around the world.

Touch DNA Sampling Methods: Efficacy Evaluation and Systematic Review

Collection and interpretation of "touch DNA" from crime scenes represent crucial steps during criminal investigations, with clear consequences in courtrooms. Although the main aspects of this type of evidence have been extensively studied, some controversial issues remain. For instance, there is no conclusive evidence indicating which sampling method results in the highest rate of biological material recovery. Thus, this study aimed to describe the actual considerations on touch DNA and to compare three different sampling procedures, which were "single-swab", "double-swab", and "other methods" (i.e., cutting out, adhesive tape, FTA® paper scraping), based on the experimental results published in the recent literature. The data analysis performed shows the higher efficiency of the single-swab method in DNA recovery in a wide variety of experimental settings. On the contrary, the double-swab technique and other methods do not seem to improve recovery rates. Despite the apparent discrepancy with previous research, these results underline certain limitations inherent to the sampling procedures investigated. The application of this information to forensic investigations and laboratories could improve operative standard procedures and enhance this almost fundamental investigative tool's probative value.

Time since contact influences DNA profiling success of cartridges and fired cartridge casings

Forensic DNA analysis of cartridges and fired cartridge casings remains challenging, possibly due to the heat and pressure generated during firing of the weapon as well as metal ions from the casings that have been suggested to initiate DNA degradation and inhibit PCR during the DNA profiling process. Even though recently developed DNA recovery protocols have shown to significantly improve DNA yields and DNA profile success rates no information is available on whether the time interval between contact and the DNA recovery process has an influence on these outcomes. In the current study 40 cartridges and 40 fired cartridge casings were left untreated for 24 h or 1 week after which the rinse-and-swab technique was used to collect DNA. Higher DNA yields and higher DNA profile success rates were obtained from cartridges compared to fired cartridge casings. The same general observation was made when cartridges and fired cartridge casings were processed after 24 h compared to after 1 week. In addition, DNA profiles suitable for comparison could still be generated from samples when real-time PCR quantification indicated DNA concentrations < 0.001 ng/μl, suggesting that quantification results may not be reliable when assessing the presence of DNA on such items. In conclusion, the results indicate that cartridges and fired cartridge casings should be processed for DNA profiling as soon as possible and that DNA quantification results should be interpreted with caution as DNA profiles suitable for comparison could be missed.

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.

Forensic proteomics

Protein is a major component of all biological evidence, often the matrix that embeds other biomolecules such as polynucleotides, lipids, carbohydrates, and small molecules. The proteins in a sample reflect the transcriptional and translational program of the originating cell types. Because of this, proteins can be used to identify body fluids and tissues, as well as convey genetic information in the form of single amino acid polymorphisms, the result of non-synonymous SNPs. This review explores the application and potential of forensic proteomics. The historical role that protein analysis played in the development of forensic science is examined. This review details how innovations in proteomic mass spectrometry have addressed many of the historical limitations of forensic protein science, and how the application of forensic proteomics differs from proteomics in the life sciences. Two more developed applications of forensic proteomics are examined in detail: body fluid and tissue identification, and proteomic genotyping. The review then highlights developing areas of proteomics that have the potential to impact forensic science in the near future: fingermark analysis, species identification, peptide toxicology, proteomic sex estimation, and estimation of post-mortem intervals. Finally, the review highlights some of the newer innovations in proteomics that may drive further development of the field. In addition to potential impact, this review also attempts to evaluate the stage of each application in the development, validation and implementation process. This review is targeted at investigators who are interested in learning about proteomics in a forensic context and expanding the amount of information they can extract from biological evidence.

Fractionation of DNA and protein from individual latent fingerprints for forensic analysis

Human touch samples represent a significant portion of forensic DNA casework. Yet, the generally low abundance of genetic material combined with the predominantly extracellular nature of DNA in these samples makes DNA-based forensic analysis exceptionally challenging. Human proteins present in these same touch samples offer an abundant and environmentally-robust alternative. Proteogenomic methods, using protein sequence variants arising from nonsynonymous DNA mutations, have recently been applied to forensic analysis and may represent a viable option looking forward. However, DNA analysis remains the gold standard and any proteomics-based methods would need to consider how DNA could be co-extracted from samples without significant loss. Herein, we describe a simple workflow for the collection, enrichment and fractionation of DNA and protein in latent fingerprint samples. This approach ensures that DNA collected from a latent fingerprint can be analyzed by traditional DNA casework methods, while protein can be proteolytically digested and analyzed via standard liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry-based proteomics methods from the same touch sample. Sample collection from non-porous surfaces (i.e., glass) is performed through the application of an anionic surfactant over the fingermark. The sample is then split into separate DNA and protein fractions following centrifugation to enrich the protein fraction by pelleting skin cells. The results indicate that this workflow permits analysis of DNA within the sample, yet highlights the challenge posed by the trace nature of DNA in touch samples and the potential for DNA to degrade over time. Protein deposited in touch samples does not appear to share this limitation, with robust protein quantities collected across multiple human donors. The quantity and quality of protein remains robust regardless of fingerprint age. The proteomic content of these samples is consistent across individual donors and fingerprint age, supporting the future application of genetically variable peptide (GVP) analysis of touch samples for forensic identification.

DNA recovery from unfired and fired cartridge cases: A comparison of swabbing, tape lifting, vacuum filtration, and direct PCR

The ability to recover trace DNA from fired cartridge cases can help establish important leads regarding the handler of the ammunition. Over recent years, several DNA recovery techniques for fired ammunition have been published. Three techniques of significant interest include tape lifting, direct PCR, and vacuum filtration. This study aimed to compare these to the swabbing method currently employed in our jurisdiction. Brass and nickel cartridges of five different calibres were spiked with 20ng of saliva and subject to DNA collection using all four DNA recovery methods. Unfired and fired cartridges were tested to examine the effects of firing. Swabbing recovered a greater quantity of DNA than vacuum filtration while no significant differences were found between swabbing and tape-lifting. The calibre of ammunition had no effect on DNA recovery. Firing significantly reduced DNA yield from nickel cartridges, while unfired brass cartridges returned less DNA than unfired nickel cartridges. PCR inhibition was not observed in any samples, although degradation indices suggested that most samples were slightly or moderately degraded. Analysis of profiles showed that swabbing and tape lifting resulted in greater numbers of alleles from fired nickel and brass cartridges compared to direct PCR. Samples from nickel cartridges were found to have a greater number of uploadable profiles than samples from brass cartridges. In addition, three mixed profiles were obtained from the single source spiked cartridges as well as evidence of pre-existing DNA on uncleaned cartridges and contaminating alleles on cleaned cartridges. Our results suggest that tape-lifting can be a suitable alternative to swabbing, but that caution must be taken when interpreting profiles from fired cartridge cases as small amounts of DNA not associated with the handling of the cartridges may be present.