Monday, September 21, 2020

Touch DNA: The effect of the deposition pressure on the quality of latent fingermarks and STR profiles

Must read

Ex-NFL star Hernandez convicted of murder, sentenced to life

Former New England Patriots star Aaron Hernandez was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison Wednesday for a deadly late-night shooting,...

New York Initiative to Help Other Cities Clear Rape-Kit Backlogs

In 2000, New York had 17,000 untested rape kits, a yearslong accumulation of potential evidence in some of the city’s most violent crimes. Over...

CSI in the wild: Forensic specialists join fight to protect our wildlife

FORENSIC techniques usually deployed in major murder investigations are the latest weapon in the fight against wildlife crime. Police specialist Chris Gannicliffe has more than...

People about to commit a crime shouldn’t throw stones… Why? Because we can get good fingerprints off them!

Every crime scene examiner would undoubtedly been approach by an investigator or detective at some point in their career with the subtle request of...
Michael Whyte
Crime Scene Officer and Fingerprint Expert with over 12 years experience in Crime Scene Investigation and Latent Print Analysis. The opinions or assertions contained on this site are the private views of the author and are not to be construed as those of any professional organisation or policing body.
- Forensic Podcast -

Latent fingerprints present unique, and sometimes the only, evidence found at a crime scene. Several factors affect their quality, including deposition pressure. Its effect on fingerprint size and quality, and on STR amplification success rate, is an emerging area of interest in forensic science.

A recent study published in ‘Forensic Science International: Genetics‘ investigated whether deposition pressure of a fingerprint had an impact upon the amount of DNA recovered.

This study examined 540 fingerprint samples, each consisting of index, middle and ring fingers, deposited by 30 donors on glass, polythene and paper under a range of weights from 0.1 to 10 kg. Both length and width of fingerprints increased with the increasing deposition pressure. Fingerprints deposited under lower (≤0.5 kg) deposition pressure varied in size (p < 0.01), while those deposited at higher (≥3 kg) deposition pressure were more consistent.

Fingerprint quality on glass and polythene, as determined by the AFIS minutiae count and by a fingerprint examiner on a scale from 0 to 4, improved with the increasing deposition pressure, but it deteriorated on polythene at deposition pressure of 10 kg. fingerprint quality on paper continued to improve from deposition pressure of 1 kg up to the maximum of 10 kg.

The effect deposition pressure has on the efficacy of DNA profiling from latent fingerprints was significant as shown by an increase in the DNA amount recovered, the number of amplified loci per sample, and the number of forensically useful DNA profiles (defined here as those with ≥8 full STR loci detected) as deposition pressure increased. This effect was most pronounced with polythene (R = 0.98) and paper (R = 0.96). Altogether, the success rate of DNA profiling varied from 16.3% in fingerprints deposited on paper to 21.2% and 22.5% of those on polythene and glass. The highest number of useful DNA profiles was obtained from glass under deposition pressure of 10 kg.

Forensically useful fingerprints obtained at low (≤1 kg) deposition pressure from all three substrates significantly outnumbered that of STR profiles, while an opposite, though less pronounced trend, was observed at high (≥3 kg) deposition pressure on polythene and paper.

Application of the simple device for collecting of fingerprints under controlled pressure designed for this study, and the palm-up mode of fingerprint deposition as described, allowed us to eliminate the undesirable effect of the hand self-weight and to objectively assess the actual effect of increasing deposition pressure on fingerprint size and quality, as well as on the efficacy of DNA profiling.

Read the paper here

Touch DNA: The effect of the deposition pressure on the quality of latent fingermarks and STR profiles, Forensic Science International: Genetics, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.10.016

- Advertisement -

More articles

- Advertisement -

Latest article

Trees and shrubs might reveal the location of decomposing bodies

Plants could help investigators find dead bodies. Botanists believe the sudden flush of nutrients into the soil from decomposition may affect nearby foliage. If...

Are Detectives discounting the associative value of fingerprints that fall short of an identification in their investigations?

Every day, Fingerprint Experts in every latent office across the globe examine fingermarks that they determine to fall short of an identification....

Using the NCIC Bayesian Network to improve your AFIS searches

This National Crime Information Centre (NCIC) Bayesian network is based on the statistical data of general patterns of fingerprints on the hands...

DNA decontamination of fingerprint brushes

Using fingerprint brushes across multiple crime scenes yields a high risk of DNA cross-contamination. Thankfully an Australian study has discovered a quick and easy way to safely decontaminate fingerprint brushes to prevent this contamination risk and allows the brushes to be safely reused even after multiple cleaning cycles.

Detection of latent fingerprint hidden beneath adhesive tape by optical coherence tomography

Adhesive tape is a common item which can be encountered in criminal cases involving rape, murder, kidnapping and explosives. It is often the case...