Secondary DNA transfer by working gloves.
Clicks: 158
ID: 16479
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Star Article
70.3
/100
158 views
129 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
StarRanked #18 of 18 articles by views in forensic science international genetics
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
With the development of highly sensitive STR profiling methods, combined with sound statistical tools, DNA analysis on the (sub-)source level is hardly ever seriously questioned in court. More often, the exact mode of DNA transfer to the crime scene is questioned. In burglary cases, in particular when gloves are worn, secondary DNA transfer is often discussed as explanation for finding a DNA profile matching the accused because it is well known that gloves can act as a potential vector for indirect DNA transfer. In this study we investigated the shedder status as a possible factor influencing the extent of secondary DNA transfer to a crime scene, with the person committing the crime wearing working gloves. Firstly, the shedder status for 40 participants (20 male, 20 female) was determined, following a previously published procedure. Good shedders (n = 12) were found to deposit a higher amount and quality of DNA onto objects, compared to bad shedders (n = 25). Secondly, participants were paired into four groups (good with good; good with bad; bad with good; bad with bad), each group consisting of five pairs. The first participant (P1) of each pair used working gloves to pack and carry a box to simulate a house move. Two days later, the second participant (P2) of the pair wore the same pair of gloves to simulate a burglary, using a screwdriver as a break-in tool. After taking swabs of the outside and inside of a glove (primary DNA transfer) and the handle of the screwdriver (secondary DNA transfer), full DNA analysis was performed. Our experiments show that good shedders, overall, deposit more DNA than bad shedders, both onto the outside and the inside of the glove, regardless of being P1 or P2. When conducting the experiments with two participants sharing the same shedder status, no significant differences occurred in the number of deposited alleles. In six out of 19 cases a DNA profile matching P1 was found (binary LR>10) on the screwdriver and in all six cases P1 was a good shedder. Our results indicate that the shedder status of an individual affects the extent of DNA transfer. They further confirm the possibility of an innocent person's DNA profile being found on an object they never handled.
| Reference Key |
otten2019secondaryforensic
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Otten, Laura;Banken, Sabrina;Schürenkamp, Marianne;Schulze-Johann, Kristina;Sibbing, Ursula;Pfeiffer, Heidi;Vennemann, Marielle; |
| Journal | forensic science international genetics |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
S1872-4973(19)30116-4
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.