4.5 Article

Developmental Validation of the ParaDNA® Screening System - A presumptive test for the detection of DNA on forensic evidence items

Journal

FORENSIC SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL-GENETICS
Volume 11, Issue -, Pages 73-79

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.02.004

Keywords

Evidence triage; Melt curve analysis; DNA detection; Direct PCR; Rapid DNA; STR analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Current assessment of whether a forensic evidence item should be submitted for STR profiling is largely based on the personal experience of the Crime Scene Investigator (CSI) and the submissions policy of the law enforcement authority involved. While there are chemical tests that can infer the presence of DNA through the detection of biological stains, the process remains mostly subjective and leads to many samples being submitted that give no profile or not being submitted although DNA is present. The ParaDNA (R) Screening System was developed to address this issue. It consists of a sampling device, pre- loaded reaction plates and detection instrument. The test uses direct PCR with fluorescent HyBeaconTM detection of PCR amplicons to identify the presence and relative amount of DNA on an evidence item and also provides a gender identification result in approximately 75 minutes. This simple-to-use design allows objective data to be acquired by both DNA analyst and non-specialist personnel, to enable a more informed submission decision to be made. The developmental validation study described here tested the sensitivity, reproducibility, accuracy, inhibitor tolerance, and performance of the ParaDNA Screening System on a range of mock evidence items. The data collected demonstrates that the ParaDNA Screening System identifies the presence of DNA on a variety of evidence items including blood, saliva and touch DNA items. (C) 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available