Assessing the impact of common forensic presumptive tests on the ability to obtain results using a novel rapid DNA platform.

Article English OPEN
Donachie, GE ; Dawnay, N ; Ahmed, R ; Naif, S ; Duxbury, NJ ; Tribble, ND

The rise of DNA evidence to the forefront of forensic science has led to high sample numbers being submitted for profiling by investigators to casework laboratories: bottleneck effects are often seen resulting in slow turnaround times and sample backlog. The ParaDNA(®) Screening and Intelligence Tests have been designed to guide investigators on the viability of potential sources of DNA allowing them to determine which samples should be sent for full DNA analysis. Both tests are designed to augment the arsenal of available forensic tests for end users and be used concurrently to those commonly available. Therefore, assessing the impact that common forensic tests have on such novel technology is important to measure. The systems were tested against various potential inhibitors to which samples may be exposed as part of the investigative process. Presumptive test agents for biological materials (blood, semen and saliva) and those used as fingerprint enhancement agents were both used. The Screening Test showed a drop in performance following application of aluminium powder and cyanoacrylate (CNA) on fingerprints samples; however this drop in performance was not replicated with high template DNA. No significant effect was observed for any agent using the Intelligence Test. Therefore, both tests stand up well to the chemical agents applied and can be used by investigators with confidence that system performance will be maintained.
  • References (7)

    [1] M. Vennemann, G. Scott, L. Curran, F. Bittner, S.S. Tobe, Sensitivity and specificity of presumptive tests for blood, saliva and semen, Forensic Sci. Med. Pathol. 10 (2014) 69-75.

    [2] J.H. An, K.J. Shin,W.I. Yang, H.Y. Lee, Body fluid identification in forensics, BMB Rep. 45 (2012) 545-553.

    [3] Association of Chief Police Officers (England and Wales), The DNA Good Practice Manual, ACPO, London, 2005.

    [4] J.J. Raymond, R.A.H. van Oorschot, P.R. Gunn, S.J. Walse, C. Roux, Trace DNA success rates relating to volume crime offences, Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2 (2009) 136-137 Suppl.

    [5] N. Dawnay, B. Stafford-Allen, D. Moore, S. Blackman, P. Rendell, E.K. Hanson, J. Ballantyne, B. Kallifatidis, J. Mendel, D.K. Mills, R. Nagy, S. Wells, Developmental validation of the ParaDNA1 Screening System - a presumptive test for the detection of DNA on forensic evidence items, Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 11 (2014) 73-79.

    [6] G. Ball, N. Dawnay, R. Stafford-Allen, M. Panasiuk, P. Rendell, S. Blackman, N. Duxbury, S.Wells, Concordance study between the ParaDNA1 Intelligence Test a Rapid DNA profiling assay, and a conventional STR typing kit (AmpFlSTR® SGM Plus1), Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 16 (2015) 48-51.

    [7] S. Blackman, N. Dawnay, G. Ball, B. Stafford-Allen, N. Tribble, P. Rendell, K. Neary, E.K. Hanson, J. Ballantyne, B. Kallifatidis, J. Mendel, D.K. Mills, S. Wells, Developmental validation of the ParaDNA1

  • Similar Research Results (2)
  • Metrics
    views in OpenAIRE
    views in local repository
    downloads in local repository

    The information is available from the following content providers:

    From Number Of Views Number Of Downloads
    LJMU Research Online - IRUS-UK 0 185
Share - Bookmark