Comparative Study of Touch DNA from Different Surfaces: Amelogenin Locus Analysis for Forensic Purposes
International Journal of Medical Toxicology and Forensic Medicine,
Vol. 16 (2026),
1 January 2026
,
Page 1-8
https://doi.org/10.22037/ijmtfm.v16.50874
Abstract
Background: This study examines the concentration of touch DNA on various surfaces using analysis of the amelogenin locus to identify the donor’s gender. Touch DNA, which is transferred through contact, was collected from masks, iron door handles, plastic, and glass. DNA extraction and amplification were performed using PCR.
Methods: Touch DNA samples were collected from masks, iron door handles, plastic, and glass using sterile swabs after contact by male and female donors. DNA extraction was performed using the Chelex method, followed by PCR amplification targeting the amelogenin locus. DNA concentration was measured and compared across different surface types to evaluate variations in DNA transfer.
Results: The findings indicate that masks provided the highest DNA concentration, while plastic and glass had the lowest. Factors such as surface type, individual activity, and environmental conditions significantly influence DNA concentration. Additionally, male donors consistently left more DNA than female donors, consistent with previous studies. The study highlights the importance of surface roughness and porosity in DNA retention, with rougher surfaces generally retaining more DNA.
Conclusion: This research offers valuable insights for forensic investigators by demonstrating the utility of touch DNA in linking individuals to crime scenes. However, more extensive studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these results and strengthen conclusions.
- Touch DNA, Surface DNA retention, Amelogenin loci, DNA recovery, Forensic genetics
How to Cite
References
[1] Saini M, Choudhary S, Sharma P, Saini D. DNA Finger priniting in Indian Criminal Justice system: Future Prespectives. J Indian Acad Forensic Med. 2024;46(1):184–6. [DOI: 10.5957/ijafm.2024.46.1.032]
[2] Gupta A, Singh BK. Fingerprint-Based Prediction of Gender: An Important tool in Criminal Investigation. J Indian Acad Forensic Med. 2024;46(2):224–6. [DOI: 10.5957/ijafm.2024.46.2.046]
[3] Devaraj DK, Cheruvathoor DD, Haris PS, Murugesan M. Determination of Sexual Dimorphism using Panoramic Radiograph –A Cross Sectional Study from Kerala, India. J Indian Acad Forensic Med. 2024;46(2):287–91. [DOI: 10.5957/ijafm.2024.46.2.069]
[4] Onofri M, Altomare C, Severini S, Tommolini F, Lancia M, Carlini L, et al. Direct and Secondary Transfer of Touch DNA on a Credit Card: Evidence Evaluation Given Activity Level Propositions and Application of Bayesian Networks. Genes (Basel). 2023;14(996):1–20. [DOI: 10.3390/genes14070996]
[5] Burrill J, Daniel B, Frascione N. A review of trace “Touch DNA” deposits: Variability factors and an exploration of cellular composition. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2019;39:8–18. [DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.11.019]
[6] Yudianto A, Kurniawan A, Rizky BN, Ikhsan MK, Morina S, Napitupulu WD, et al. Genetic Variation using the 21 STR Codis Loci for Forensic Identification Examinations among Siblings of Madurese Living in Surabaya. J Int Dent Med Res. 2023;16(4):1616. [DOI: 10.23805/ijdmr.2023.04.1616]
[1] Tozzo P, Mazzobel E, Marcante B, Delicati A, Caenazzo L. Touch DNA Sampling Methods: Efficacy Evaluation and Systematic Review. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(24):1–19. [DOI: 10.3390/ijms232415540]
[2] Kumar, Bhandari, Chouhan, Sahajpal. Touch DNA: Revolutionizing Evidentiary DNA Forensics. Int J Forensic Sci. 2023;8(3):1–8. [DOI: 10.23880/ijfs-16000198]
[3] Sessa F, Salerno M, Bertozzi G, Messina G, Ricci P, Ledda C, et al. Touch DNA: Impact of handling time on touch deposit and evaluation of different recovery techniques: An experimental study. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):1–9. [DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-41623-6]
[4] Saamia V, Yudianto A, Nurjayadi M, Novitasari N, Furqoni AH. Limit Detection of Short Tandem Repeats (STR) Analysis on Touch DNA Samples. Indones J Chem. 2017;1–12. [DOI: 10.22146/ijc.22132]
[5] Nurdianto AR, Setiawan F, Yudianto A, Nurdianto RF, Sunariani J. Dna Touch Str Codis As Legitimate Evidence in Uncovering Criminal Acts. J Biosains Pascasarj. 2024;26(1):77–86. [DOI: 10.29303/jbp.v26i1.5259]
[6] Schulte J, Rittiner N, Seiberle I, Kron S, Schulz I. Collecting touch DNA from glass surfaces using different sampling solutions and volumes: Immediate and storage effects on genetic STR analysis. J Forensic Sci. 2023;68(4):1133–47. [DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.15186]
[7] Recipon M, Agniel R, Leroy-Dudal J, Fritz T, Carreiras F, Hermitte F, et al. Targeting cell-derived markers to improve the detection of invisible biological traces for the purpose of genetic-based criminal identification. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):1–15. [DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-45366-y]
[8] Yudianto A, Nzilibili SMM, Harjanto P, Setiawan F. The use of touch DNA analysis in forensic identification focusing on STR CODIS LOCI THO1, CSF1PO and TPOX. Indian J Forensic Med Toxicol. 2020;14(3):1692–6. [DOI: 10.37506/ijfmt.v14i3.1378]
[9] Alketbi SK, Goodwin W. The Impact of Area Size and Fabric Type on Touch DNA Collected from Fabric. J Forensic Sci Crim Inves. 2022;16(1):1–5. [DOI: 10.19080/JFSCI.2022.16.555880]
[10] Alketbi SK. The Affecting Factors of Touch DNA. J Forensic Res. 2018;09(03):1–4. [DOI: 10.4172/2157-7145.1000448]
[11] Valentine JL, Presler-Jur P, Mills H, Miles S. Evidence Collection and Analysis for Touch Deoxyribonucleic Acid in Groping and Sexual Assault Cases. J Forensic Nurs. 2021;17(2):67–75. [DOI: 10.1097/JFN.0000000000000329]
[12] Pesaresi M, Buscemi L, Alessandrini F, Cecati M, Tagliabracci A. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of DNA recovered from fingerprints. Int Congr Ser. 2003;1239(C):947–51. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ics.2004.02.018]
[13] Bille TW, Cromartie C, Farr M. Effects of cyanoacrylate fuming, time after recovery, and location of biological material on the recovery and analysis of DNA from post-blast pipe bomb fragments. J Forensic Sci. 2009;54(5):1059–67. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01141.x]
[14] Raymond JJ, Walsh SJ, van Oorschot RAH, Gunn PR, Evans L, Roux C. Assessing trace DNA evidence from a residential burglary: Abundance, transfer and persistence. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Ser. 2008;1(1):442–3. [DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigss.2007.10.018]
[15] Ramadanti NA, Putri DH. The Effect of Polyacrilamide Gel Electrophoresis Duration on separation of Cassava SSR PCR Fragments. Bioscience. 2019;3(1):14. [DOI: 10.31014/2022.3.1.14]
[16] Dutta P, Bhosale S, Singh R, Gubrellay P, Patil J, Sehdev B, et al. Amelogenin gene - The pioneer in gender determination from forensic dental samples. J Clin Diagnostic Res. 2017;11(2):ZC56–9. [DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/23958.9458]
[17] Shadrach B, Commane M, Hren C, Warshawsky I. A rare mutation in the primer binding region of the amelogenin gene can interfere with gender identification. J Mol Diagnostics. 2004;6(4):401–5. [DOI: 10.1016/S1525-1578(10)60538-7]
[18] Gummadi S, Kandula VN. a Review on Electrophoresis, Capillary Electrophoresis and Hyphenations. Int J Pharm Sci Res. 2020;11(12):6038. [DOI: 10.13040/IJPSR.0975-8232.11(12).6038-44]
- Abstract Viewed: 53 times
- PDF Downloaded: 50 times