Advanced search
1 file | 832.91 KB Add to list

Sources of DNA contamination and decontamination procedures in the forensic laboratory

Author
Organization
Abstract
The sensitivity of forensic DNA typing techniques can cause problems when evidence samples are inadvertently contaminated with DNA from another source. Therefore, precautions need to be taken to minimize the risk of contamination. In this study, laboratory air and surfaces, tools and equipment were evaluated as potential sources of contaminating DNA. Subsequently, two decontamination procedures, i.e. the conventionally used sodium hypochlorite and the commercially available DNA decontamination solution DNA ZAPTM (Applied Biosystems), were compared for their use in removing potentially contaminating DNA from the laboratory working environment. From our results, it can be concluded that air is unlikely to be the source of observed DNA contamination in the laboratory whereas DNA accumulating on surfaces, tools and equipment within the laboratory environment may potentially be transferred to evidence samples. DNA ZAPTM outperformed the conventionally used sodium hypochlorite decontamination procedure. Stringent preventive measures and decontamination of equipment and laboratory surfaces is important to avoid secondary transfer of this contaminating DNA to evidence samples.
Keywords
polymerase chain reaction, short tandem repeat analysis, DNA, decontamination, contamination

Downloads

  • j for research 2011.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 832.91 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Vandewoestyne, Mado et al. “Sources of DNA Contamination and Decontamination Procedures in the Forensic Laboratory.” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PRACTICE AND RESEARCH 2 (2011): n. pag. Print.
APA
Vandewoestyne, M., Van Hoofstat, D., De Groote, S., Van Thuyne, N., Haerinck, S., Van Nieuwerburgh, F., & Deforce, D. (2011). Sources of DNA contamination and decontamination procedures in the forensic laboratory. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PRACTICE AND RESEARCH, (2).
Chicago author-date
Vandewoestyne, Mado, David Van Hoofstat, Sabine De Groote, Nicky Van Thuyne, Saskia Haerinck, Filip Van Nieuwerburgh, and Dieter Deforce. 2011. “Sources of DNA Contamination and Decontamination Procedures in the Forensic Laboratory.” International Journal of Forensic Practice and Research (2).
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Vandewoestyne, Mado, David Van Hoofstat, Sabine De Groote, Nicky Van Thuyne, Saskia Haerinck, Filip Van Nieuwerburgh, and Dieter Deforce. 2011. “Sources of DNA Contamination and Decontamination Procedures in the Forensic Laboratory.” International Journal of Forensic Practice and Research (2).
Vancouver
1.
Vandewoestyne M, Van Hoofstat D, De Groote S, Van Thuyne N, Haerinck S, Van Nieuwerburgh F, et al. Sources of DNA contamination and decontamination procedures in the forensic laboratory. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PRACTICE AND RESEARCH. 2011;(2).
IEEE
[1]
M. Vandewoestyne et al., “Sources of DNA contamination and decontamination procedures in the forensic laboratory,” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PRACTICE AND RESEARCH, no. 2, 2011.
@article{1891149,
  abstract     = {The sensitivity of forensic DNA typing techniques can cause problems when evidence samples are inadvertently contaminated with DNA from another source. Therefore, precautions need to be taken to minimize the risk of contamination. In this study, laboratory air and surfaces, tools and equipment were evaluated as potential sources of contaminating DNA. Subsequently, two decontamination procedures, i.e. the conventionally used sodium hypochlorite and the commercially available DNA decontamination solution DNA ZAPTM (Applied Biosystems), were compared for their use in removing potentially contaminating DNA from the laboratory working environment. From our results, it can be concluded that air is unlikely to be the source of observed DNA contamination in the laboratory whereas DNA accumulating on surfaces, tools and equipment within the laboratory environment may potentially be transferred to evidence samples. DNA ZAPTM outperformed the conventionally used sodium hypochlorite decontamination procedure. Stringent preventive measures and decontamination of equipment and laboratory surfaces is important to avoid secondary transfer of this contaminating DNA to evidence samples.},
  author       = {Vandewoestyne, Mado and Van Hoofstat, David and De Groote, Sabine and Van Thuyne, Nicky and Haerinck, Saskia and Van Nieuwerburgh, Filip and Deforce, Dieter},
  issn         = {2231-6787},
  journal      = {INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PRACTICE AND RESEARCH},
  keywords     = {polymerase chain reaction,short tandem repeat analysis,DNA,decontamination,contamination},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {3},
  title        = {Sources of DNA contamination and decontamination procedures in the forensic laboratory},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7145.S2-001},
  year         = {2011},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric