The Recovery and Persistence of Salivary DNA on Human Skin
June Kenna M.Sc.
Forensic Science Laboratory, Garda HQ, Phoenix Park, Dublin 8, Dublin, Ireland.
Search for more papers by this authorMaureen Smyth Ph.D.
Forensic Science Laboratory, Garda HQ, Phoenix Park, Dublin 8, Dublin, Ireland.
Search for more papers by this authorLouise McKenna Ph.D.
Forensic Science Laboratory, Garda HQ, Phoenix Park, Dublin 8, Dublin, Ireland.
Search for more papers by this authorClare Dockery M.Sc.
Division of Analytical Laboratories, Joseph Street, Lidcombe, Sydney NSW 2141, Australia.
Search for more papers by this authorSeán D. McDermott Ph.D.
Forensic Science Laboratory, Garda HQ, Phoenix Park, Dublin 8, Dublin, Ireland.
Search for more papers by this authorJune Kenna M.Sc.
Forensic Science Laboratory, Garda HQ, Phoenix Park, Dublin 8, Dublin, Ireland.
Search for more papers by this authorMaureen Smyth Ph.D.
Forensic Science Laboratory, Garda HQ, Phoenix Park, Dublin 8, Dublin, Ireland.
Search for more papers by this authorLouise McKenna Ph.D.
Forensic Science Laboratory, Garda HQ, Phoenix Park, Dublin 8, Dublin, Ireland.
Search for more papers by this authorClare Dockery M.Sc.
Division of Analytical Laboratories, Joseph Street, Lidcombe, Sydney NSW 2141, Australia.
Search for more papers by this authorSeán D. McDermott Ph.D.
Forensic Science Laboratory, Garda HQ, Phoenix Park, Dublin 8, Dublin, Ireland.
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Abstract: Salivary DNA is encountered in many crimes, such as sexual assaults and murders. In this study, saliva from three male donors was deposited on the skin of three female recipients. The amount of male salivary DNA remaining on the female skin was measured over a 96-h period using the Quantifiler™ Y Human Male DNA Quantification Kit. In eight of the nine experiments, a full male DNA profile matching the donor was obtained even after 96 h. In addition, the study showed that the concentration of salivary DNA varied from donor to donor and from day to day. The efficiency of two recovery methods, wet and dry swabbing and minitaping, was compared. The results indicate the tapelift method gave higher DNA recovery. This study also examined the secondary transfer of salivary DNA from skin to fabrics. Cotton and polyester give higher DNA transfer than leather.
References
- 1 Rees B, Baxter SJ. The identification of saliva in stains in forensic casework. Med Sci Law 1975; 15(1): 37–41.
- 2 Sweet D, Lorente JA, Valenzuela A, Lorente M, Villanueva E. PCR-Based DNA typing of saliva stains recovered from human skin. J Forensic Sci 1997; 42(3): 447–51.
- 3 Sweet D, Bowers CM. Accuracy of bite mark overlays: a comparison of five common methods to produce exemplars of a suspects dentition. J Forensic Sci 1998; 43(2): 362–8.
- 4 Whittaker DK. Some laboratory studies on the accuracy of bitemark comparison. Int Dent J 1975; 25: 166–70.
- 5 Sweet D, Shutler GG. Analysis of salivary DNA evidence from a bite mark on a body submerged in water. J Forensic Sci 1999; 44(5): 1069–72.
- 6 Hochmeister MN, Budowle B, Jung J, Borer UV, Comey CT, Dirnhofer R. PCR-based typing of DNA extracted from cigarette butts. Int J Legal Med 1991; 104: 229–33.
- 7 Sweet D, Hildebrand D. Saliva from cheese bite yields DNA profile of a burglar: a case report. Int J Legal Med 1999; 112(3): 201–20.
- 8 Sinclair K, McKechnie VM. DNA extraction from stamps and envelope flaps using QIAamp and QIAshredder. J Forensic Sci 2000; 45(1): 229–30.
- 9 Clift A, Lamont CM. Saliva in forensic odontology. J Forensic Sci Soc 1974; 14: 241–5.
- 10 Sweet D, Lorente M, Lorente JA, Valenzuela A, Villanueva E. An improved method to recover saliva from human skin. The double swab technique. J Forensic Sci 1997; 42(2): 320–2.
- 11 Graham AMG, Rutty GN. Investigation into “normal” background DNA on adult necks: implications for DNA profiling of manual strangulation victims. J Forensic Sci 2008; 53(5): 1074–82.
- 12 Hall D, Fairley M. A single approach to the recovery of DNA and firearm discharge residue evidence. Sci Justice 2004; 44(1): 15–9.
- 13 Sweet D, Lorente M, Valenzuela A, Lorente JA, Alvarez JC. Increasing DNA extraction yield from saliva stains with a modified chelex method. Forensic Sci Int 1996; 83: 167–77.
- 14 Redd AJ, Agellon AB, Kearney VA, Contreras VA, Karafet T, Park H, et al. Forensic value of novel STRs on the human Y chromosome. Forensic Sci Int 2002; 130: 97–111.
- 15 Butler JM, Schoske R, Vallone PM, Kline MC, Redd AJ, Hammer MF. A novel multiplex for simultaneous amplification of 20 Y chromosome STR markers. Forensic Sci Int 2002; 129: 10–24.
- 16 Sibille I, Duverneuil C, Lorin de la Grandmaison G, Guerrouache K, Teissière F, Durigon M, et al. Y-STR DNA amplification as biological evidence in sexually assaulted female victims with no cytological detection of spermatozoa. Forensic Sci Int 2002; 125: 212–6.
- 17 Pounds CA, Smalldon KW. The transfer of fibres between clothing materials during simulated contacts and their persistence during wear—part 1: fibre transference. J Forensic Sci Soc 1975; 15: 17–27.
- 18 Hicks T, Vanina R, Margot P. Transfer and persistence of glass fragments on garments. Sci Justice 1996; 36: 101–7.
- 19
Robertson J,
Roux C.
From the crime scene to the laboratory. In: J Robertson,
JM Grieve, editors. Forensic examination of fibres. International Forensic Science and Investigation Series, 2nd edn. London, U.K., Philadelphia, PA: CRC Press, 1999; 89–100.
10.1201/9780203484517 Google Scholar
- 20 Willott GM, Allard JE. Spermatozoa—their persistence after sexual intercourse. Forensic Sci Int 1982; 19: 135–54.
- 21 Keating SM, Higgs DF. The detection of amylase on swabs from sexual assault cases. J Forensic Sci Soc 1994; 34(2): 89–93.
- 22 Smith BC, Holland MM, Sweet DL, Dizinno JA. DNA and the forensic odontologist. In: CM Bowers, GL Bell, editors. Manual of forensic odontologyl, 3rd edn. Colorado Springs, CO: American Society of Forensic Odontology, 1997; 283–98.
- 23 Lowe A, Murray C, Whitaker J, Tully G, Gill P. 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.
- 24 Phipps M, Petricevic S. The tendency of individuals to transfer DNA to handle items. Forensic Sci Int 2007; 168: 162–8.
- 25
Green RL,
Roinestad IC,
Boland C,
Hennessy LK.
Developmental validation of the QuantifilerTM real–time PCR for the quantification of human nuclear DNA samples.
J Forensic Sci
2005; 50(4): 1–17.
10.1520/JFS2004478 Google Scholar
- 26 Tsutsumi H, Higashide K, Mizuno Y, Tamaki K, Katsumata Y. Identification of saliva stains by determination of the specific action of amylase. Forensic Sci Int 1991; 50(1): 37–42.
- 27 Bright JA, Petricevic F. Recovery of trace DNA and its application to DNA profiling on shoe insoles. Forensic Sci Int 2004; 145: 7–12.
- 28 Dockery C. The persistence of saliva on skin and clothing [Master’s dissertation]. London (England): South Bank University, 2005.
- 29 Budowle B, Onorato AJ, Callaghan TF, Della Manna A, Gross AM, Guerrieri RA, et al. Mixture interpretation: defining the relevant features for guidelines for the assessment of mixed DNA profiles in forensic casework. J Forensic Sci 2009; 54(4): 810–21.
- 30 Maguire S, Ellaway B, Bowyer VL, Graham AM, Rutty GN. Retrieval of DNA from the faces of children aged 0-5 years: a technical note. J Forensic Nurs 2008; 4(1): 40–4.
- 31 French CEV, Jensen CG, Vintiner SK, Elliot DA, McGlashan SR. A novel histological technique for distinguishing between epithelial cells in forensic casework. Forensic Sci Int 2008; 178: 1–6.
Citing Literature
