Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A swab and wetting agent combination investigation for enhanced touch DNA recovery: A step towards standardisation.

International journal of legal medicine·2026
Same author

Persistence of touch deposits on a range of substrates assessed using an optimised application of Diamond Dye™.

International journal of legal medicine·2026
Same author

Using hierarchical Bayesian modelling to assess shedder test suitability.

Forensic science international. Genetics·2026
Same author

Uncovering mixture inversion: The prevalence of non-handlers as major contributors in forensic DNA evidence.

Forensic science international. Genetics·2026
Same author

Human DNA detection and its use in investigations of non-accidental injuries in animal abuse cases.

Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society·2026
Same author

Exploring multi-step human DNA transfer in semi-controlled scenarios following dog patting.

Forensic science international·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 16, 2026

Enhanced Genetic Analysis of Single Human Bioparticles Recovered by Simplified Micromanipulation from Forensic ‘Touch DNA’ Evidence
11:49

Enhanced Genetic Analysis of Single Human Bioparticles Recovered by Simplified Micromanipulation from Forensic ‘Touch DNA’ Evidence

Published on: March 9, 2015

16.9K

DNA transfer by examination tools--a risk for forensic casework?

Bianca Szkuta1, Michelle L Harvey2, Kaye N Ballantyne3

  • 1School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, 75 Pigdons Road, Waurn Ponds, Victoria 3216, Australia; Office of the Chief Forensic Scientist, Victoria Police Forensic Services Department, 31 Forensic Drive, Macleod, Victoria 3085, Australia.

Forensic Science International. Genetics
|March 4, 2015
PubMed
Summary

Forensic DNA analysis faces contamination risks from tools like scissors and forceps. This study shows DNA transfer occurs, complicating profile interpretation and highlighting the need for strict cleaning protocols to minimize contamination.

Keywords:
ContaminationDNAExamination toolsTraceTransfer

More Related Videos

Application of DNA Fingerprinting using the D1S80 Locus in Lab Classes
08:35

Application of DNA Fingerprinting using the D1S80 Locus in Lab Classes

Published on: July 17, 2021

23.8K
FISH for Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis
07:34

FISH for Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis

Published on: February 23, 2011

38.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 16, 2026

Enhanced Genetic Analysis of Single Human Bioparticles Recovered by Simplified Micromanipulation from Forensic ‘Touch DNA’ Evidence
11:49

Enhanced Genetic Analysis of Single Human Bioparticles Recovered by Simplified Micromanipulation from Forensic ‘Touch DNA’ Evidence

Published on: March 9, 2015

16.9K
Application of DNA Fingerprinting using the D1S80 Locus in Lab Classes
08:35

Application of DNA Fingerprinting using the D1S80 Locus in Lab Classes

Published on: July 17, 2021

23.8K
FISH for Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis
07:34

FISH for Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis

Published on: February 23, 2011

38.1K

Area of Science:

  • Forensic Science
  • Molecular Biology
  • Genetics

Background:

  • Increased DNA profiling sensitivity raises concerns about contamination in forensic casework.
  • Tools used in exhibit examination pose a risk for transferring contaminating DNA.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess DNA transfer risk from common forensic tools (scissors, forceps, gloves) between different substrates (cotton, glass).
  • To investigate the impact of DNA transfer on target sample profiling and interpretation in forensic casework.

Main Methods:

  • Simulated contamination by transferring dried blood and touch DNA using vectors between primary and secondary substrates.
  • Varied contact levels (heavy/light) and substrate types (cotton/glass) to mimic real-world scenarios.
  • Analyzed DNA transfer occurrence, level, and impact on target DNA profiling.

Main Results:

  • All tested vectors transferred dried blood to cotton substrates; transfer was lower with glass substrates.
  • Touch DNA transferred less efficiently than blood, with highest transfer between cotton and glass.
  • Contaminating DNA detectability decreased with background DNA, but target profiles remained detectable, though interpretation was complicated.

Conclusions:

  • Forensic tools can transfer DNA, posing a contamination risk, especially with cotton substrates.
  • While target DNA profiles are usually interpretable, contamination complicates analysis and can affect evidence probative value.
  • Strict adherence to laboratory cleaning protocols and minimizing item handling are crucial for contamination control.