Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

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

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Save article
View saved research
Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from $39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

taken from handles. The percentages given in the x-axis labels are the percentage of samples that gave a detectable amount of DNA

Fig. 7
Fig. 8

taken from bedding or pillowcases. The percentages given in the x-axis labels are the percentage of samples that gave a detectable amount of DNA

Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

Data availability

Raw tabulated results provided in csv format for all experiments.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. van Oorschot RAH, Ballantyne KN, Mitchell RJ. Forensic trace DNA: a review. Investigative Genet. 2010;1(1):14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Goray M, Eken E, Mitchell RJ, van Oorschot RAH. Secondary DNA transfer of biological substances under varying test conditions. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2010;4(2):62–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Szkuta B, Harvey ML, Ballantyne KN, van Oorschot RAH. The potential transfer of trace DNA via high risk vectors during exhibit examination. Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series. 2013;4(1):e55–6.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Taylor D. Using continuous DNA interpretation methods to revisit likelihood ratio behaviour. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2014;11:144–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Moretti T, Just R, Kehl S, Willis L, Buckleton J, Bright J-A, Taylor D, Onorato A. Internal validation of STRmix for the interpetation of single source and mixed DNA profiles. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2017;29:126–44.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bright J-A, Richards R, Kruijver M, Kelly H, McGovern C, Magee A, McWhorter A, Ciecko A, Peck B, Baumgartner C, Buettner C, Jolicoeur C, McKenna C, Gallacher C, Wright D, Johnson D, Catella D, Lien E, Duncan G, Bundy J, Echard J, Lowe J, Stewart J, Corrado K, Kaplan M, Hassler MY, McDonald N, Hulme P, Oefelein RH, Monpetit S, Strong M, Malsom S, Myers S, Welti S, Feiter A, Moretti T, Mahon T, Grille T, Kalafut T, Martinucci V, Beamer V, Taylor D, Buckleton JS. Internal validation of STRmix™ - a multi laboratory response to PCAST. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2018;34:11–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. van Oorschot RAH, Szkuta B, Meakin GE, Kokshoorn B, Goray M. DNA transfer in forensic science: a review. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2019;38:140–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Taylor D, Biedermann A, Samie L, Pun K-M, Hicks T, Champod C. Helping to distinguish primary from secondary transfer events for trace DNA. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2017;28:155–77.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Taylor D, Kokshoorn B, Biedermann A. Evaluation of forensic genetics findings given activity level propositions: a review. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2018;36:34–49.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Neuhuber F, Kreindl G, Kastinger T, Dunkelmann B, Zahrer W, Cemper-Kiesslich J, Grießner I. Police officer’s DNA on crime scene samples – indirect transfer as a source of contamination and its database-assisted detection in Austria. Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series. 2017;6:e608–9.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Szkuta B, Harvey ML, Ballantyne KN, van Oorschot RAH. DNA transfer by examination tools – a risk for forensic casework? Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2015;16:246–54.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Goray M, Pirie E, van Oorschot RAH. DNA transfer: DNA acquired by gloves during casework examinations. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2019;38:167–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Nontiapirom K, Bunakkharasawat W, Sojikul P, Panvisavas N. Assessment and prevention of forensic DNA contamination in DNA profiling from latent fingerprint. Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series. 2019;7(1):546–8.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Szkuta B, Harvey ML, Ballantyne KN, van Oorschot RAH. Residual DNA on examination tools following use. Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series. 2015;5:e495–7.

    Google Scholar 

  15. van den Berge M, Wagner S, Meijers E, Kokshoorn B, Kloosterman A, van der Scheer M, Sijen T. Minimizing hand-to-glove DNA contamination. Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series. 2019;7(1):19–20.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Goray M, van Oorschot RAH, Mitchell JR. DNA transfer within forensic exhibit packaging: Potential for DNA loss and relocation. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2012;6(2):158–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Schwendener G, Moret S, Cavanagh-Steer K, Roux C. Can “contamination” occur in body bags?-the example of background fibres in body bags used in Australia. Forensic Sci Int. 2016;266:517–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kloosterman A, Sjerps M, Quak A. Error rates in forensic DNA analysis: definition, numbers, impact and communication. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2014;12:77–85.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Pickrahn I, Kreindl G, Müller E, Dunkelmann B, Zahrer W, Cemper-Kiesslich J, Neuhuber F. Contamination incidents in the pre-analytical phase of forensic DNA analysis in Austria—Statistics of 17 years. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2017;31:12–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Willis SM, McKenna L, McDermott S, O'Donell G, Barrett A, Rasmusson B, Nordgaard A, Berger CEH, Sjerps NJ, Lucena-Molina J-J, Zadora G, Aitken C, Lovelock T, Lunt L, Champod C, Biedermann A, Hicks TN, Taroni F. ENFSI guideline for evaluative reporting in forensic science, European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (available at http://enfsi.eu/sites/default/files/documents/external_publications/m1_guideline.pdf), 2015.

  21. Taylor D, Bright J-A, Buckleton J. The interpretation of single source and mixed DNA profiles. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2013;7(5):516–28.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Taylor D, Bright J-A, McGovern C, Neville S, Grover D. Allele frequency database for GlobalFiler(TM) STR loci in Australian and New Zealand populations. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2017;28:e38–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2019.

  24. Van Oorschot RA, Jones M. DNA fingerprints from fingerprints. Nature. 1997;387(6635):767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fonneløp AE, Egeland T, Gill P. Secondary and subsequent DNA transfer during criminal investigation. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2015;17:155–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Goray M, Mitchell RJ, van Oorschot RA. Investigation of secondary transfer of skin cells under controlled conditions. Legal Medicine. 2010;12:117–120.

  27. Margiotta G, Tasselli G, Tommolini F, Lancia M, Massetti S, Carnevali E. Risk of dna transfer by gloves in forensic casework. Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series. 2015;5:e527–9.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Otten L, Banken S, Schürenkamp M, Schulze-Johann K, Sibbing U, Pfeiffer H, Vennemann M. Secondary DNA transfer by working gloves. Forensic Sci Int: Genetics. 2019;43:102126.

  29. Poy AL, van Oorschot RA. Trace DNA Presence, origin, and transfer within a forensic biology laboratory and its potential effect on casework. J Forensic Identification. 2006;56(4):558–576.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The points of view expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the points of view of the author’s organisations.

Funding

No direct funding received. Consumables provided by Forensic Science SA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Biological Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia

    Sasha Carson & Duncan Taylor

  2. Forensic Science SA, PO Box 2790, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia

    Luke Volgin, Damien Abarno & Duncan Taylor

Authors
  1. Sasha Carson
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Luke Volgin
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Damien Abarno
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Duncan Taylor
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Sasha Carson – laboratory work and data analysis. Luke Volgin – project conceptual design and manuscript preparation. Damien Abarno – manuscript preparation. Duncan Taylor – project conceptual design, data analysis and manuscript preparation.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Duncan Taylor.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The collection of samples was approved by the Research and Development Committee of Forensic Science SA (FSSA).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 17 KB) (download DOCX )

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carson, S., Volgin, L., Abarno, D. et al. The potential for investigator-mediated contamination to occur during routine search activities. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 18, 299–310 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-022-00465-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-022-00465-6

Keywords