ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2023
Effects of solvent-based adhesive removal on the subsequent dual analysis of fingerprint and DNA.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interpol review of fingermark composition and visualization 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The combined approach of classical fingerprinting and DNA profiling is a powerful tool in forensic investigations of latent "touch" traces. However, little attention has been paid to the organic solvents frequently used in dactyloscopic laboratories to facilitate the separation of adhesive evidence prior to fingerprint development and downstream effects on subsequent DNA profiling. In the present study, we tested a selection of adhesive removers (n = 9) and assessed their potential impact on DNA recovery and amplification by PCR. Thereby, we identified and characterized novel PCR inhibitors. All investigated chemicals contain volatile organic compounds that evaporate under normal indoor atmospheric conditions. Exposure to certain solvents resulted in increased DNA degradation, but only if evaporation was prevented. A series of adhesive-removal experiments were conducted with prepared mock evidence (self-adhesive postage stamps affixed to paper envelope) to investigate the impact of treatment time and the location of applied traces on DNA recovery and dactyloscopy, respectively. Due to the early onset of print decomposition, we found that only a short treatment time was compatible with the development of fingerprints on the adhesive side of a stamp. Solvents also removed DNA from the adhesive surface, thus resulting in a marked shift in the substrate distribution of recovered DNA from the stamp to the envelope, but not in the reverse direction. Furthermore, we observed that treatment with conventional fingerprint reagents lead to a significant reduction in the amounts of DNA recovered from stamps, while the additional use of adhesive removers did not significantly enhance this effect.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.