Touch DNA Sampling Methods: Efficacy Evaluation and Systematic Review

Int J Mol Sci. 2022 Dec 8;23(24):15541. doi: 10.3390/ijms232415541.

Abstract

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.

Keywords: crime scene; forensic genetics; genetic profile; systematic review; touch DNA.

Publication types

  • Review
  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • DNA / genetics
  • DNA Fingerprinting* / methods
  • Specimen Handling / methods
  • Touch*

Substances

  • DNA

Grants and funding

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript. All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organisation or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.