Abstract
Immunolabeling is a technique, which has recently been introduced to enhance the quality of developed fingermarks and subsequently strengthen the evidential value. The effect of this method on subsequent DNA analysis, however, has not been explored yet. Therefore, the current pilot study aimed to determine whether STR profiling is possible after immunolabeling. Since immunolabeling involves washing steps which could reduce DNA quantities, the use of different fixatives including methanol, formaldehyde and universal molecular fixative (UMFIX) were investigated. STR profiles from the (immunolabeled) fingermarks were generated after four days and four weeks by a direct PCR method to enable comparison of relatively fresh and old fingermarks. The fingermarks were deposited on diverse forensically relevant substrates, including glass, metal and tile. STR profiles could be recovered for all tested fixatives with no significant difference in performance. However, the mean number of detected alleles was the highest when methanol was used for fixation. Furthermore, immunolabeling on aged fingermarks (4 weeks) was also possible, but the number of detected alleles showed a non-significant decrease. DNA could be recovered from deposits on all substrates, of which glass showed the highest mean number of detected alleles followed by metal and tile.
Highlights
Dactyloscopic analysis and short tandem repeat (STR) profiling are the cornerstones in forensic investigations
Immunolabeling was successfully performed on the fingermarks that were fixated with methanol, formaldehyde and universal molecular fixative (UMFIX)
Fin germarks were treated with different fixatives and subsequently aged to explore its effect on the performance of STR profiling after development with immunolabeling
Summary
Dactyloscopic analysis and short tandem repeat (STR) profiling are the cornerstones in forensic investigations. Swabbing to collect DNA for STR profiling can destroy or alter the ridge details, as such, fingerprint development techniques are often applied to fingermarks before DNA analysis [1]. Such processing order can only be successfully applied if the fingerprint development technique has no adverse effects on DNA typing. DNA analysis is beneficial when the ridge pattern is of insufficient quality for conventional fingerprint identification or when fingermarks are contaminated by other body fluids, for instance in case of bloody fingermarks [2] or fingermarks from cigarette butts [3]. It is important to understand the effect of various fingermark development methods on DNA typing
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
