Highlights
- •DD solution application does not cause cellular fixation.
- •Distance from the charge influences cell loss and STR profiling success.
- •Indoor and outdoor detonations will lead to different STR amplification success.
- •Direct PCR can be utilised to obtain DNA profiles from post detonation samples.
- •With large surface areas, standard extraction methods are preferred to direct.
Abstract
As the use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in a broad spectrum of offences
continues, it is vital that research is performed to assess the capabilities of the
forensic DNA profiling technology currently available to provide information as to
potential perpetrators. This work investigates some of the most important gaps in
our understanding surrounding the poor success rates in DNA profiling obtained through
the sampling of touch DNA on post-detonation IED samples. It has been previously suggested
that the use of Diamond™ Nucleic Acid Dye may fix cells to a surface, therefore reducing
the effect of an experimental process to remove or damage those cells. This was found
not to be the case for samples undergoing a detonation as there was no difference
in the resultant post-detonation profiles between the stained samples, stained prior
to detonation, and unstained samples. The comparison of data from previously performed
research, within an enclosed explosives chamber, to real-world outdoor detonation
events in a rural and dusty environment was investigated. It was found that there
was a significant difference between the environments for the aluminium but not for
the battery or electrical tape substrates indicating that environment has the potential
to influence STR success through the introduction of PCR inhibitors; humic acid within
rural natural dust was introduced here. No difference was observed in cell loss due
to the detonation between environments and the dirt within the PCR was higher in the
‘outdoor’ samples. The effect on cellular retention and damage due to the sample’s
distance from the charge has been thoroughly investigated through incremental 100 mm
exposure. Distance from the charge was found to affect every metric analysed; these
being the cell loss from samples, the number of alleles amplified in resultant direct
PCR profiles, and the total RFU of the subsequent profiles. These data outline the
importance of this work allowing results to be assessed and triage decisions be made
accordingly.
The analysis of wood, PVC pipe, a mobile phone with rubber buttons, a SIM card, and
a circuit board showed that none of these samples at 400 mm from the charge caused
substrate specific PCR inhibition. On-site collection teams do not need to triage
collection based on these sample types as there was no significant difference observed
in their ability to return DNA profiling data. Surface area and inhibitor presence
are key variables to consider when determining STR processing workflow for post-detonation
samples as for samples with larger surface areas within the outdoor environment PCR
post-extraction is preferential to direct PCR.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Forensic Science International: GeneticsAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
C.V. EXTREMISM. Country Reports on Terrorism 2019 2019.
- Influence of ink and smoke ATM security systems on dactyloscopy and subsequent DNA analysis after detonation.Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2021; 54102540
- Sensitivity and baseline noise of three new generation forensic autosomal STR kits: PowerPlex® Fusion, VeriFilerTM Plus and Investigator® 24plex QS.Forensic Sci. Int. Rep. 2019; 1100049
- Genetic profiling from challenging samples: direct PCR of touch DNA..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. Suppl. Ser. 2013; 4: e224-e225
- DNA profiles from fingermarks: a mock case study..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. Suppl. Ser. 2015; 5: e154-e155
- DNA profiles from matchsticks..Aust. J. Forensic Sci. 2019; 51: 1-5
- DNA profiles generated from a range of touched sample types..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2018; 36: 13-19
- Direct PCR amplification of forensic touch and other challenging DNA samples: a review..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2018; 32: 40-49
- Recovery of DNA and fingermarks following deployment of render-safe tools for vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIED)..Forensic Sci. Int. 2011; 210: 182-187
- Survival of forensic trace evidence on improvised explosive devices: perspectives on individualisation..Sci. Rep. 2020; 10: 1-11
- Detection of fingermarks from post-blast debris: a review..J. Forensic Identif. 2018; 68
- Physical characterization and recovery of corroded fingerprint impressions from postblast copper pipe bomb fragments..J. Forensic Sci. 2013; 58: 776-781
- Latent fingerprint recovery from simulated vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices..J. Forensic Identif. 2012; 62
- A comparison between direct PCR and extraction to generate DNA profiles from samples retrieved from various substrates.Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2012; 6: 407-412
- Systematic study for DNA recovery and profiling from common IED substrates: from laboratory to casework..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2015; 17: 53-60
- Successful STR amplification of post-blast IED samples by fluorescent visualisation and direct PCR..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2020; 46102256
- Improved STR profiles from improvised explosive device (IED): fluorescence latent DNA detection and direct PCR..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2019; 41: 168-176
- The recovery of touch DNA from RDX-C4 evidences..Int. J. Leg. Med. 2021; 135: 393-397
- Collection and direct amplification methods using the GlobalFilerTM kit for DNA recovered from common pipe bomb substrates..Sci. Justice. 2019; 59: 580-584
- Successful STR amplification of post-blast IED samples by fluorescent visualisation and direct PCR..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2020; 46102256
- Investigative studies into the recovery of DNA from improvised explosive device containers..J. Forensic Sci. 2012; 57: 602-609
- Cell free DNA as a component of forensic evidence recovered from touched surfaces..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2012; 6: 26-30
Federal Bureau of Investigation. Frequently Asked Questions on CODIS and NDIS. 06.04.2020]; Available from: 〈https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet〉.
- Legislative and policy implications for the use of rapid DNA technology in the Australian context..Forensic Sci. Policy Manag. Int. J. 2017; 8: 26-37
- Assessment of changes to DNA database interrogation at forensic science SA.Aust. J. Forensic Sci. 2019; 51: S68-S71
- PCR inhibitors–occurrence, properties and removal..J. Appl. Microbiol. 2012; 113: 1014-1026
- Implosion of composite cylinders due to underwater impulsive loads.Dynamic Response and Failure of Composite Materials and Structures. 2017: 239-262
- Nuclear safety.Elsevier, 2006: 279-286
- Forensic touch DNA recovery from metal surfaces-a review..Sci. Justice. 2020; 60: 206-215
- Touch DNA localization and direct PCR: an improved workflow for STR typing from improvise explosive devices..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. Suppl. Ser. 2017; 6: e610-e612
- Shedding light on shedders..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2018; 36: 20-25
- Assessment of DiamondTM Nucleic Acid Dye for the identification and targeted sampling of latent DNA in operational casework..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2021; 55102579
- Visualising latent DNA on swabs..Forensic Sci. Int. 2018; 291: 115-123
- Identification through typing of DNA recovered from touch transfer evidence: parameters affecting yield of recovered human DNA..J. Forensic Identif. 2008; 58: 33
- The propensity of individuals to deposit DNA and secondary transfer of low level DNA from individuals to inert surfaces..Forensic Sci. Int. 2002; 129: 25-34
- The tendency of individuals to transfer DNA to handled items..Forensic Sci. Int. 2007; 168: 162-168
- DNA profiles from fingermarks..BioTechniques. 2014; 57: 259-266
- Visualising latent DNA on tapes..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. Suppl. Ser. 2019;
- Use of a spray device to locate touch DNA on casework samples..J. Forensic Sci. 2020; 65: 1280-1288
Kanokwongnuwut, P., et al., Shedding Light on Shedders. Forensic Science International: Genetics, 2018.
Team, R.C., R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 2013.
- The effect of pressure on DNA deposition by touch..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. Suppl. Ser. 2017; 6: e12-e14
- Quantitative techniques to discriminate petroleum oils using LED-induced fluorescence.Wtaer Pollut. VIII Monit. Manag. 2006; 1: 255-262
- How many cells are required for successful DNA profiling?.Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2021; 51102453
- Forensic implications of PCR inhibition-a review..Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2012; 6: 297-305
- Direct PCR improves the recovery of DNA from various substrates..J. Forensic Sci. 2015; 60: 1558-1562
- Direct PCR: a review of use and limitations..Sci. Justice. 2020; 60: 303-310
Article info
Publication history
Published online: December 06, 2021
Accepted:
December 3,
2021
Received in revised form:
December 2,
2021
Received:
September 30,
2021
Identification
Copyright
© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
