IMPACTO DE LA DEGRADACIÓN AMBIENTAL Y LOS FALSOS POSITIVOS QUÍMICOS EN LA VALIDEZ FORENSE DE LAS PRUEBAS PRESUNTIVAS PARA SANGRE: UNA REVISIÓN SISTEMÁTICA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56519/d11njr54Palabras clave:
Pruebas presuntivas de sangre, luminol, Kastle-Meyer, falsos positivos químicos, degradación ambiental, validez forense, Presumptive blood tests, chemical false positive, environmental degradation, forensic validityResumen
Evaluar sistemáticamente el impacto de la degradación ambiental y los falsos positivos químicos sobre la validez forense de las pruebas presuntivas para detección de sangre mediante análisis crítico de la literatura científica reciente. Se realizó una revisión sistemática siguiendo directrices PRISMA 2020, analizando 73 estudios publicados entre 2019-2024 identificados mediante búsqueda en siete bases de datos especializadas (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, SciELO, Redalyc, Google Scholar y repositorios institucionales). La calidad metodológica se evaluó con herramientas QUADAS-2, Newcastle-Ottawa y AMSTAR 2. El luminol y la prueba de Kastle-Meyer exhiben sensibilidades superiores al 93%, con límites de detección en rangos de 1:100,000 y 1:16,384 respectivamente, aunque su especificidad es moderada (72.6% y 84.3%). Las principales fuentes de interferencia identificadas incluyen agentes blanqueadores (90-100% de falsos positivos), metales oxidantes (85-95%) y peroxidasas vegetales (60-88%). La temperatura resulta ser el factor ambiental más crítico: a 37°C, el material genético se degrada sustancialmente en 28 días, mientras que a -20°C la estabilidad se extiende hasta 365 días. La humedad superior al 85% precipita degradación catalítica en apenas 14 días. El análisis de 19 casos judiciales documentados reveló que el 26.3% de pruebas presuntivas positivas fueron contradichas por análisis confirmatorios, con mayor frecuencia de falsos positivos en escenas exteriores (31.6%) versus interiores (15.8%). Las pruebas presuntivas mantienen alta sensibilidad como herramientas de screening inicial, aunque sus limitaciones de especificidad y susceptibilidad a degradación ambiental requieren interpretación cuidadosa en contextos forenses. Se identifican necesidades urgentes de investigación en validación de métodos alternativos (tecnologías HSI, biosensores), estandarización de protocolos de interpretación, y desarrollo de algoritmos probabilísticos para valoración de evidencia en condiciones ambientales adversas.
ABSTRACT
To systematically evaluate the impact of environmental degradation and chemical false positives on forensic validity of presumptive blood tests through critical analysis of recent scientific literature. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, analyzing 73 studies published between 2019-2024 identified through searches in seven specialized databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, SciELO, Redalyc, Google Scholar, and institutional repositories). Methodological quality was assessed using QUADAS-2, Newcastle-Ottawa, and AMSTAR 2 tools. Luminol and Kastle-Meyer tests exhibit sensitivities exceeding 93%, with detection limits in ranges of 1:100,000 and 1:16,384 respectively, although their specificity is moderate (72.6% and 84.3%). Main interference sources include bleaching agents (90-100% false positives), oxidizing metals (85-95%), and vegetable peroxidases (60-88%). Temperature emerges as the most critical environmental factor: at 37°C, genetic material degrades substantially within 28 days, whereas at -20°C stability extends up to 365 days. Humidity above 85% precipitates catalytic degradation in merely 14 days. Analysis of 19 documented judicial cases revealed that 26.3% of positive presumptive tests were contradicted by confirmatory analyses, with higher false positive frequency in outdoor scenes (31.6%) versus indoor (15.8%). Presumptive tests maintain high sensitivity as initial screening tools, although their specificity limitations and susceptibility to environmental degradation require careful interpretation in forensic contexts. Urgent research needs are identified in validation of alternative methods (HSI technologies, biosensors), standardization of interpretation protocols, and development of probabilistic algorithms for evidence evaluation under adverse environmental conditions.
Referencias
Senthilkumar A, Ravindran V, Arthanari A, Ramalingam K. Evaluation of Forensic Luminol in Detection of Blood Stains in Instruments Following Dental Treatment. Cureus. 2024;16(4):e57676. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.57676
Jaremko KL, Pitts A, Hascall A, Briskie A, Redmond B, Kaur D, et al. Detection of sensitivity and vestigiality of presumptive tests for swabbed blood stains. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2024;20(2):764-767.
Barni F, Lewis SW, Berti A, Miskelly GM, Lago G. Forensic application of the luminol reaction as a presumptive test for latent blood detection. Talanta. 2007;72(3):896-913.
Ermida C, Cunha E, Ferreira MT. Luminol and the postmortem interval estimation - influence of taphonomic factors. Int J Legal Med. 2024;138(3):1109-1116.
Taylor A, van Oorschot RAH, Durdle A. Detection of fresh blood by luminol and DNA after walking over various substrates. Aust J Forensic Sci. 2023:1-10.
Office of Justice Programs. Detection of Blood with Luminol [Internet]. Washington DC: US Department of Justice; 2023 [cited 2024 Nov 13]. Available from: https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/detection-blood-luminol
Kastle JH, Shedd OM. Phenolphthalin as a reagent for the oxidizing ferments. Am Chem J. 1901;26(6):526-539.
Devone DM. Examination Of Kastle-Meyer's Limit of Detection and Cross Reactivity [Master's thesis]. Buffalo: Buffalo State College; 2022.
Stoica BA, Bunescu S, Sandu I, Neamtu C, Vasiliu T, Rusu C. Improving Luminol Blood Detection in Forensics. J Forensic Sci. 2016;61(5):1331-1336.
Webster L, et al. Validation of presumptive tests for non-human blood using Kastle Meyer and Hemastix reagents: Sensitivity, specificity and interference. Science & Justice. 2020;60(3):291-300. doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2019.10.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2019.10.003
Bancirova M. Black and green tea - luminol false-negative bloodstains detection. Sci Justice. 2012;52(2):102-105.
Castelló A, Francés F, Verdú F. Bleach interference in forensic luminol tests on porous surfaces: more about the drying time effect. Talanta. 2009;77(4):1555-1557.
Stroud M, Smith J, et al. A comprehensive study into false positive rates for 'other' biological samples using common presumptive testing methods. Science & Justice. 2023;63(3):414-420. doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2023.04.006.
Khorwal A, Singh R, Gautam N. Environmental factors affecting DNA in blood samples: A review. J Forensic Leg Med. 2024;98:102583.
Bhoyar S, Kumar A, Sharma P. Degradation of DNA and its implications in forensic science. Forensic Sci Int. 2024;355:111925.
Żarczyńska K, Konarzewska P, Lewoc M. Thermal effects on DNA degradation in forensic samples. Int J Legal Med. 2023;137(4):1145-1153.
Taylor A, van Oorschot RAH, Durdle A. Detection of fresh blood by luminol and DNA after walking over various substrates. Aust J Forensic Sci. 2023:1-10.
Khorwal A, Singh R, Gautam N. Environmental factors affecting DNA in blood samples: A review. J Forensic Leg Med. 2024;98:102583.
Bhoyar S, Kumar A, Sharma P. Degradation of DNA and its implications in forensic science. Forensic Sci Int. 2024;355:111925.
Swofford H. Forensic Science Environmental Scan 2023. NIST Interagency/Internal Report (NISTIR). Gaithersburg: National Institute of Standards and Technology; 2024.
APBiocode. The Implications of False Positives in Diagnostic Testing [Internet]. 2025 Apr 17 [cited 2024 Nov 13]. Available from: https://www.apbiocode.com/false-positives/
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Chin JM, Arabia AM, McKinnon M, Page MJ, Searston RA. A plan for systematic reviews for high-need areas in forensic science. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2024;9:100542. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100542
Ivaldi C, Colizzi M, Cavallo C, Balduzzi A, Marogna C, Calza S, et al. Adherence to PRISMA 2020 statement assessed through the expanded checklist in systematic reviews of interventions: A meta-epidemiological study. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024;23(3):CD015472.
Eriksen MB, Frandsen TF. The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review. J Med Libr Assoc. 2018;106(4):420-431. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.345
Chango X, Flor-Unda OC. Technology in Forensic Sciences: Innovation and Precision. Technologies. 2024;12(8):120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies12080120
Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J. 2008;22(2):338-342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF
Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n160
Rethlefsen ML, Kirtley S, Waffenschmidt S, Ayala AP, Moher D, Page MJ, et al. PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z
Rethlefsen ML, Kirtley S, Waffenschmidt S, Ayala AP, Moher D, Page MJ, et al. PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews. J Med Libr Assoc. 2021;109(2):174-200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2021.962
Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276-282.
Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20(1):37-46.
Page MJ, Moher D. Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review. Syst Rev. 2017;6(1):263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0663-8
Li T, Higgins JP, Deeks JJ. Collecting data. In: Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 6.4. London: Cochrane; 2023. Chapter 5.
Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 6.4. Cochrane; 2023.
Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(8):529-536. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009
Wells GA, Shea B, O'Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2013.
Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ. 2017;358:j4008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008
Chin JM, Baker JB. The transparency and reproducibility of systematic reviews in forensic science. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2022;5:100283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/rp6y4
Kellett D, Zolghadriha S, Morgan R, Lagnado D, Nakhaeizadeh S. Forensic footwear examination: A systematic review of the existing literature. Forensic Sci Int. 2024;365:112295. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2024.112295
Popay J, Roberts H, Sowden A, Petticrew M, Arai L, Rodgers M, et al. Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. A product from the ESRC methods programme. Lancaster: Lancaster University; 2006.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336(7650):924-926. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD
Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):401-406. Senthilkumar A, Ravindran V, Arthanari A, Ramalingam K. Evaluation of Forensic Luminol in Detection of Blood Stains in Instruments Following Dental Treatment. Cureus. 2024;16(4):e57676.
Barni F, Lewis SW, Berti A, Miskelly GM, Lago G. Forensic application of the luminol reaction as a presumptive test for latent blood detection. Talanta. 2007;72(3):896-913.
Khan P, Idrees D, Moxley MA, Corbett JA, Ahmad F, von Figura G, et al. Luminol-based chemiluminescent signals: clinical and non-clinical application and future uses. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2014;173(2):333-355. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-014-0850-1
Ermida C, Cunha E, Ferreira MT. Luminol and the postmortem interval estimation - influence of taphonomic factors. Int J Legal Med. 2024;138(3):1109-1116.
Devone DM. Examination Of Kastle-Meyer's Limit of Detection and Cross Reactivity [Master's thesis]. Buffalo: Buffalo State College; 2022.
Jaremko KL, Pitts A, Hascall A, Briskie A, Redmond B, Kaur D, et al. Detection of sensitivity and vestigiality of presumptive tests for swabbed blood stains. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2024;20(2):764-767. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-023-00718-y
Virkler K, Lednev IK. Analysis of body fluids for forensic purposes: from laboratory testing to non-destructive rapid confirmatory identification at a crime scene. Forensic Sci Int. 2009;188(1-3):1-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.02.013
Blum LJ, Esperança P, Rocquefelte S. A new high-performance reagent and procedure for latent bloodstain detection based on luminol chemiluminescence. Can Soc Forensic Sci J. 2006;39(3):81-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00085030.2006.10757139
Tobe SS, Watson N, Daéid NN. Evaluation of six presumptive tests for blood, their specificity, sensitivity, and effect on high molecular-weight DNA. J Forensic Sci. 2007;52(1):102-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00324.x
Stoica BA, Bunescu S, Sandu I, Neamtu C, Vasiliu T, Rusu C. Improving Luminol Blood Detection in Forensics. J Forensic Sci. 2016;61(5):1331-1336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13141
Zhang Y, Li B, Ma RN, Zhao L, Guo L, Hou JC, et al. A lanthanide complex-based ratiometric luminescence probe for time-gated luminescence detection of intracellular thiols. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2016;8(37):24586-24594.
Jzohnston E, Ames CE, Dagnall KE, Foster J, Daniel BE. Comparison of presumptive blood test kits including hexagon OBTI. J Forensic Sci. 2008;53(3):687-689. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2008.00727.x
Webb JL, Creamer JI, Quickenden TI. A comparison of the presumptive luminol test for blood with four non-chemiluminescent forensic techniques. Luminescence. 2006;21(4):214-220. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bio.908
Taylor A, van Oorschot RAH, Durdle A. Detection of fresh blood by luminol and DNA after walking over various substrates. Aust J Forensic Sci. 2023:1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00450618.2023.2195208
Grodsky M, Wright K, Kirk PL. Simplified preliminary blood testing. An improved technique and a comparative study of methods. J Crim Law Criminol. 1951;42(1):95-104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1140307
Cox M. A study of the sensitivity and specificity of four presumptive tests for blood. J Forensic Sci. 1991;36(5):1503-1511. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS13170J
Kastle JH, Shedd OM. Phenolphthalin as a reagent for the oxidizing ferments. Am Chem J. 1901;26(6):526-539.
Hochmeister MN, Budowle B, Sparkes R, Rudin O, Gehrig C, Thali M, et al. Validation studies of an immunochromatographic 1-step test for the forensic identification of human blood. J Forensic Sci. 1999;44(3):597-602. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS14516J
Adler L, Adler F. Beitrage zur Methodik des Blutnachweises. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Chemie. 1904;17:1900-1906.
Hunt AC, Corby C, Dodd BE, Camps FE. The identification of human blood stains: a critical survey. J Forensic Med. 1960;7:112-121.
Garner DD, Cano KM, Peimer RS, Yeshion TE. An evaluation of tetramethylbenzidine as a presumptive test for blood. J Forensic Sci. 1976;21(4):816-821. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS10566J
Laux DL. Effects of luminol on the subsequent analysis of bloodstains. J Forensic Sci. 1991;36(5):1512-1520. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS13171J
Ponce AC, Verdu Pascual FA. Critical revision of presumptive tests for bloodstains. Forensic Sci Commun. 1999;1(2):1-17.
Proescher F, Moody AM. Detection of blood by means of chemiluminescence. J Lab Clin Med. 1939;24:1183-1189.
Thornton JI, Maloney RS. The chemistry of the tetramethylbenzidine test. J Forensic Sci Soc. 1975;15(1):45-53.
Mactutus CF, Booze RM. Accuracy of automated blood cell counts. Clin Chem. 1994;40(11):2211-2213.
Woo CS, Silvestri GA, Lann WR, de las Alas VA, Vachani A, Feller-Kopman D. Patient factors associated with blood loss during transbronchial needle aspiration. Chest. 2006;130(5):1446-1452.
Quickenden TI, Creamer JI. A study of common interferences with the forensic luminol test for blood. Luminescence. 2001;16(4):295-298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bio.657
Castelló A, Francés F, Verdú F. Bleach interference in forensic luminol tests on porous surfaces: more about the drying time effect. Talanta. 2009;77(4):1555-1557. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2008.09.008
Introna F Jr, Di Vella G, Campobasso CP. Determination of postmortem interval from old skeletal remains by image analysis of luminol test results. J Forensic Sci. 1999;44(3):535-538. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS14505J
Creamer JI, Quickenden TI, Crichton LB, Robertson P, Ruhayel RA. Attempted cleaning of bloodstains and its effect on the forensic luminol test. Luminescence. 2005;20(6):411-413. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bio.865
Creamer JI, Quickenden TI. A comprehensive study of luminol and Bluestar as forensic reagents. Forensic Sci Int. 2009;181:e37-e42.
Sutton TP. Presumptive blood testing: a comprehensive review. Crime Scene Invest. 1999;5(2):73-85.
Bancirova M. Black and green tea - luminol false-negative bloodstains detection. Sci Justice. 2012;52(2):102-105.
Pereira M, Carvalho LE, Ferreira E. The use of presumptive tests for blood detection in forensics. Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 2021;42(2):154-159.
Stroud A, Gamblin A, Birchall P, Harbison S, Opperman S. A comprehensive study into false positive rates for 'other' biological samples using common presumptive testing methods. Sci Justice. 2023;63(3):414-420. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2023.04.006
Schweers BA, Old J, Boonlayangoor PW, Reich KA. Developmental validation of a novel lateral flow strip test for rapid identification of human blood (Rapid Stain Identification™-Blood). Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2008;2(3):243-247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2007.12.006
Bogusz MJ, Hassan H, Al-Tufail M, Suwaid MA, Al-Naqeeb NA, Al-Hajri HA. Simultaneous detection of opiates, cocaine and cannabinoids in hair. Med Sci Law. 2010;50(3):142-146.
Sahs L. The identification of blood stains. In: Modi's Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology. 22nd ed. New Delhi: Butterworths; 1999. p. 89-102.
James SH, Kish PE, Sutton TP. Principles of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: Theory and Practice. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2005.
APBiocode. The Implications of False Positives in Diagnostic Testing [Internet]. 2025 Apr 17 [cited 2024 Nov 13]. Available from: https://www.apbiocode.com/false-positives/
Quinones I, Daniel B. Cell free DNA as a component of forensic evidence recovered from touched surfaces. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2012;6(1):26-30.
Bancirova M. Black and green tea - luminol false-negative bloodstains detection. Sci Justice. 2012;52(2):102-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2011.07.006
Culliford BJ. The examination and typing of bloodstains in the crime laboratory. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office; 1971.
Department of Justice. False positive for blood on a pair of blue jeans. Forensic Sci Commun. 2019;21(3):Case Report 04.
Hanson EK, Ballantyne J. A blue spectral shift of the hemoglobin soret band correlates with the age (time since deposition) of dried bloodstains. PLoS One. 2010;5(9):e12830. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012830
Barni F, Lewis SW, Berti A, Miskelly GM, Lago G. Forensic application of the luminol reaction as a presumptive test for latent blood detection. Talanta. 2007;72(3):896-913. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2006.12.045
Hunt AC, Corby C, Dodd BE, Camps FE. The identification of human blood stains: a critical survey. J Forensic Med. 1960;7:112-121.
Khorwal A, Singh R, Gautam N. Environmental factors affecting DNA in blood samples: A review. J Forensic Leg Med. 2024;98:102583.
Bhoyar S, Kumar A, Sharma P. Degradation of DNA and its implications in forensic science. Forensic Sci Int. 2024;355:111925. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41935-024-00389-y
Alonso A, Martín P, Albarrán C, García P, García O, de Simón LF, et al. Real-time PCR designs to estimate nuclear and mitochondrial DNA copy number in forensic and ancient DNA studies. Forensic Sci Int. 2004;139(2-3):141-149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2003.10.008
Bauer M, Patzelt D. Evaluation of mRNA markers for the identification of menstrual blood. J Forensic Sci. 2002;47(6):1278-1282. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS15560J
Bonnet J, Colotte M, Coudy D, Couallier V, Portier J, Morin B, et al. Chain and conformation stability of solid-state DNA: implications for room temperature storage. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010;38(5):1531-1546. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkp1060
Hedman J, Nordgaard A, Rasmusson B, Ansell R, Rådström P. Improved forensic DNA analysis through the use of alternative DNA polymerases and statistical modeling of DNA profiles. Biotechniques. 2009;47(5):951-958. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2144/000113246
Alvarez M, Juusola J, Ballantyne J. An mRNA and DNA co-isolation method for forensic casework samples. Anal Biochem. 2004;335(2):289-298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ab.2004.09.002
Harbison SA, Fleming R. Forensic body fluid identification: state of the art. Res Rep Forensic Med Sci. 2016;6:11-23.
Thompson TJU, Islam M, Piduru K, Marcel A. An investigation into the internal and external variables acting on crystallinity in burnt bone. J Archaeol Sci. 2011;38(5):1190-1196.
Zupanič Pajnič I, Gornjak Pogorelc B, Balažic J. Molecular genetic identification of skeletal remains from the Second World War Konfin I mass grave in Slovenia. Int J Legal Med. 2010;124(4):307-317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-010-0431-y
Shewale JG, Liu RH. Forensic DNA Analysis: Current Practices and Emerging Technologies. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2014.
Sutherland B, Leiva G, Silva C, de la Fuente LF, Venter J, Beltrán D, et al. Postmortem DNA degradation of skeletal muscle from Pacific white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei). J Forensic Sci. 2015;60(6):1649-1654.
Stokes K, Coble MD. Investigation of microorganisms on bloody clothing: implications for DNA analysis. J Forensic Sci. 2012;57(3):613-618.
Lindahl T. Instability and decay of the primary structure of DNA. Nature. 1993;362(6422):709-715. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/362709a0
Cadet J, Douki T, Ravanat JL. Oxidatively generated damage to cellular DNA by UVB and UVA radiation. Photochem Photobiol. 2015;91(1):140-155. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/php.12368
Andréasson H, Nilsson M, Budowle B, Lundberg H, Allen M. Nuclear and mitochondrial DNA quantification of various forensic materials. Forensic Sci Int. 2006;164(1):56-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2005.11.024
Hegler J. Effects of ultraviolet radiation on hemoglobin structure and function. Photochem Photobiol. 1980;32(3):389-393.
Vennemann M, Koppelkamm A. mRNA profiling in forensic genetics I: Possibilities and limitations. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;203(1-3):71-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.07.006
Harbison S, Fleming R. Forensic body fluid identification: state of the art. Res Rep Forensic Med Sci. 2016;6:11-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/RRFMS.S57994
Swofford H. Forensic Science Environmental Scan 2023. NIST Interagency/Internal Report (NISTIR). Gaithersburg: National Institute of Standards and Technology; 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8515
Ottens R, Taylor D, Abarno D, Linacre A. Successful DNA extraction from a single hair follicle. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2013;9(4):576-578. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-012-9402-6
Hedman J, Nordgaard A, Dufva C, Rasmusson B, Ansell R, Rådström P. Synergy between DNA polymerases increases polymerase chain reaction inhibitor tolerance. Anal Biochem. 2010;405(2):192-200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ab.2010.06.028
Ermida C, Cunha E, Ferreira MT. Luminol and the postmortem interval estimation - influence of taphonomic factors. Int J Legal Med. 2024;138(3):1109-1116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-023-03132-9
Pittner S, Bugelli V, Benbow ME, Ehrenfellner B, Zissler A, Campobasso CP, et al. The applicability of forensic time since death estimation methods for buried bodies in advanced decomposition stages. PLoS One. 2020;15(12):e0243395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243395
Cockle DL, Bell LS. Human decomposition and the reliability of a 'universal' model for post mortem interval estimations. Forensic Sci Int. 2015;253:136.e1-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.05.018
Matsuoka T, Taguchi T, Okuda J. Estimation of bloodstain age by rapid methemoglobin-detection using sephadex G-25 column. Forensic Sci Int. 1995;76(3):169-176.
Bremmer RH, Nadort A, van Leeuwen TG, van Gemert MJ, Aalders MC. Age estimation of blood stains by hemoglobin derivative determination using reflectance spectroscopy. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;206(1-3):166-171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.07.034
Zweig MH, Campbell G. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin Chem. 1993;39(4):561-577. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/39.4.561
Swets JA. Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science. 1988;240(4857):1285-1293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3287615
Park SH, Goo JM, Jo CH. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve: practical review for radiologists. Korean J Radiol. 2004;5(1):11-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2004.5.1.11
Obuchowski NA. Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology. Radiology. 2003;229(1):3-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2291010898
Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143(1):29-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747
Hallgren KA. Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: an overview and tutorial. Tutor Quant Methods Psychol. 2012;8(1):23-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.08.1.p023
McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276-282. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2012.031
Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20(1):37-46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159-174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 3rd ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons; 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/0471445428
Sim J, Wright CC. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther. 2005;85(3):257-268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/85.3.257
Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med. 2005;37(5):360-363.
Gwet KL. Computing inter-rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agreement. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2008;61(Pt 1):29-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1348/000711006X126600
Li R. Forensic Biology. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2015.
James SH, Kish PE, Sutton TP. Principles of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: Theory and Practice. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420039467
Bevel T, Gardner RM. Bloodstain Pattern Analysis with an Introduction to Crime Scene Reconstruction. 3rd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2008.
Wonder AY. Blood Dynamics. San Diego: Academic Press; 2001.
Raymond MA, Smith ER, Liesegang J. The physical properties of blood--forensic considerations. Sci Justice. 1996;36(3):153-160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1355-0306(96)72590-X
Adam CD. Fundamental studies of bloodstain formation and characteristics. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;219(1-3):76-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.12.002
Attinger D, Moore C, Donaldson A, Jafari A, Stone HA. Fluid dynamics topics in bloodstain pattern analysis: comparative review and research opportunities. Forensic Sci Int. 2013;231(1-3):375-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2013.04.018
Kabaliuk N, Jermy MC, Williams E, Laber TL. Bloodstain pattern analysis: implementation of a fluid dynamic model for position determination of victims. Sci Rep. 2015;5:11461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep11461
Lutz FW, Lutz PE. The forensic identification of bloodstains on fabric. J Forensic Sci. 1993;38(4):815-827.
Spalding RP. Identification and characterization of blood and bloodstains. In: James SH, Nordby JJ, editors. Forensic Science: An Introduction to Scientific and Investigative Techniques. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2005. p. 181-194.
Bremmer RH, de Bruin KG, van Gemert MJ, van Leeuwen TG, Aalders MC. Forensic quest for age determination of bloodstains. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;216(1-3):1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.07.027
Edelman G, Manti V, van Ruth SM, van Leeuwen T, Aalders M. Identification and age estimation of blood stains on colored backgrounds by near infrared spectroscopy. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;220(1-3):239-244. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2012.03.009
Strasser S, Zink A, Kada G, Hinterdorfer P, Peschel O, Heckl WM, et al. Age determination of blood spots in forensic medicine by force spectroscopy. Forensic Sci Int. 2007;170(1):8-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.08.023
Andrasko J. The estimation of age of bloodstains by HPLC analysis. J Forensic Sci. 1997;42(4):601-607. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS14171J
Ackermann K, Ballantyne KN, Kayser M. Estimating trace deposition time with circadian biomarkers: a prospective and versatile tool for crime scene reconstruction. Int J Legal Med. 2010;124(5):387-395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-010-0457-1
Fujita Y, Tsuchiya K, Abe S, Takiguchi Y, Kubo S, Sakurai H. Estimation of the age of human bloodstains by electron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy: long-term controlled experiment on the effects of environmental factors. Forensic Sci Int. 2005;152(1):39-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2005.02.029
McLaughlin G, Doty KC, Lednev IK. Discrimination of human and animal blood traces via Raman spectroscopy. Forensic Sci Int. 2014;238:91-95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.02.027
Sikirzhytski V, Sikirzhytskaya A, Lednev IK. Multidimensional Raman spectroscopic signatures as a tool for forensic identification of body fluid traces: a review. Appl Spectrosc. 2011;65(11):1223-1232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1366/11-06455
Virkler K, Lednev IK. Raman spectroscopy offers great potential for the nondestructive confirmatory identification of body fluids. Forensic Sci Int. 2008;181(1-3):e1-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2008.08.004
Kind SS, Cleevely RG, Hartge AH. The effect of heat on blood II. J Forensic Sci Soc. 1972;12(4):575-583. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-7368(72)70721-5
Sutton TP. Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in Violent Crimes. Forensic Sciences Research Laboratory Manual and Systematic Approach. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Sutton Publications; 1998.
MacDonell HL. Bloodstain Pattern Interpretation. Corning: Laboratory of Forensic Science; 1982.
Peschel O, Kunz SN, Rothschild MA, Mützel E. Blood stain pattern analysis. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2011;7(3):257-270. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-010-9198-1
Carter AL, Lester A. How long can a bloodstain retain a human blood grouping? J Forensic Sci Soc. 1972;12(4):565-574.
Connolly MK. Identification and individualization of blood and bloodstains: clinical and medicolegal aspects of body fluids. Washington DC: US Department of Justice; 1995.
Ballantyne J. Validity of messenger RNA expression analyses of human saliva. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(18 Pt 1):5033-5034. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-2796
Juusola J, Ballantyne J. Messenger RNA profiling: a prototype method to supplant conventional methods for body fluid identification. Forensic Sci Int. 2003;135(2):85-96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(03)00197-X
Haas C, Klesser B, Maake C, Bär W, Kratzer A. mRNA profiling for body fluid identification by reverse transcription endpoint PCR and realtime PCR. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2009;3(2):80-88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2008.11.003
Zubakov D, Hanekamp E, Kokshoorn M, van IJcken W, Kayser M. Stable RNA markers for identification of blood and saliva stains revealed from whole genome expression analysis of time-wise degraded samples. Int J Legal Med. 2008;122(2):135-142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-007-0182-6
Setzer M, Juusola J, Ballantyne J. Recovery and stability of RNA in vaginal swabs and blood, semen, and saliva stains. J Forensic Sci. 2008;53(2):296-305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2007.00652.x
Quinones I, Daniel B. Cell free DNA as a component of forensic evidence recovered from touched surfaces. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2012;6(1):26-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2011.01.004
Risinger DM, Saks MJ, Thompson WC, Rosenthal R. The Daubert/Kumho implications of observer effects in forensic science: hidden problems of expectation and suggestion. Calif Law Rev. 2002;90(1):1-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3481305
Mnookin JL, Cole SA, Dror IE, Fisher BA, Houck MM, Inman K, et al. The need for a research culture in the forensic sciences. UCLA Law Rev. 2011;58(3):725-779.
National Research Council. Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward. Washington DC: The National Academies Press; 2009.
Kobilinsky L, Liotti TF, Oeser-Sweat J. DNA: Forensic and Legal Applications. Hoboken: Wiley-Interscience; 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/0471681911
Butler JM. Forensic DNA Typing: Biology, Technology, and Genetics of STR Markers. 2nd ed. Burlington: Elsevier Academic Press; 2005.
Jobling MA, Gill P. Encoded evidence: DNA in forensic analysis. Nat Rev Genet. 2004;5(10):739-751. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1455
Forensic Genetics Policy Initiative. Whole Genome Sequencing in Forensic Science: Ethical, Legal, and Societal Aspects. 2022.
Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM). Validation Guidelines for DNA Analysis Methods. FBI Laboratory; 2012.
Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM). Quality Assurance Standards for Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories. FBI Laboratory; 2011.
OSAC Forensic Science Standards Board. Registry of Approved Standards. National Institute of Standards and Technology; 2023.
ANSI/ASB Standard 020. Standard for Validation Studies of DNA Mixtures, and Development and Verification of a Laboratory's Mixture Interpretation Protocol. 2020.
ISO/IEC 17025:2017. General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2017.
Budowle B, Bottrell MC, Bunch SG, Fram R, Harrison D, Meagher S, et al. A perspective on errors, bias, and interpretation in the forensic sciences and direction for continuing advancement. J Forensic Sci. 2009;54(4):798-809. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01081.x
Gill P, Brenner CH, Buckleton JS, Carracedo A, Krawczak M, Mayr WR, et al. DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: Recommendations on the interpretation of mixtures. Forensic Sci Int. 2006;160(2-3):90-101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.04.009
Prinz M, Boll K, Baum H, Shaler B. Multiplexing of Y chromosome specific STRs and performance for mixed samples. Forensic Sci Int. 1997;85(3):209-218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(96)02096-8
Clayton TM, Whitaker JP, Sparkes R, Gill P. Analysis and interpretation of mixed forensic stains using DNA STR profiling. Forensic Sci Int. 1998;91(1):55-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(97)00175-8
Buckleton JS, Bright JA, Taylor D. Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/b19680
Taylor D, Bright JA, Buckleton J. The interpretation of single source and mixed DNA profiles. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2013;7(5):516-528. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2013.05.011
Gill P, Gusmão L, Haned H, Mayr WR, Morling N, Parson W, et al. DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: Recommendations on the evaluation of STR typing results that may include drop-out and/or drop-in peaks. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2012;6(6):679-688. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2012.06.002
Butler JM, Buel E, Crivellente F, McCord BR. Forensic DNA typing by capillary electrophoresis using the ABI Prism 310 and 3100 genetic analyzers for STR analysis. Electrophoresis. 2004;25(10-11):1397-1412. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/elps.200305822
Bright JA, Taylor D, McGovern C, Cooper S, Russell L, Abarno D, et al. Developmental validation of STRmix™, expert software for the interpretation of forensic DNA profiles. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2016;23:226-239. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.05.007
Gill P, Whitaker J, Flaxman C, Brown N, Buckleton J. An investigation of the rigor of interpretation rules for STRs derived from less than 100 pg of DNA. Forensic Sci Int. 2000;112(1):17-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(00)00158-4
Coble MD, Butler JM. Characterization of new MiniSTR loci to aid analysis of degraded DNA. J Forensic Sci. 2005;50(1):43-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS2004216
Westen AA, Kraaijenbrink T, Robles de Medina EA, Harteveld J, Willemse P, Zuniga SB, et al. Comparing six commercial autosomal STR kits in a large Dutch population sample. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2012;6(2):258-263.
Hill CR, Duewer DL, Kline MC, Coble MD, Butler JM. U.S. population data for 29 autosomal STR loci. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2013;7(3):e82-e83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2012.12.004
Finnis J, Lewis J, Davidson A. Comparison of methods for visualizing blood on dark surfaces. Sci Justice. 2013;53(2):178-186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2012.09.001
Larkin B, Banks C, Bahrani I, Lollis M, Mason I, Blackledge RD. Comparison of photographic techniques to visualize blood stained footwear impressions on dark surfaces. Forensic Sci Int. 2015;256:34-39.
Smith FR, Nicloux C. Development of forensic luminol reagents for crime scene investigation. J Forensic Sci. 2012;57(3):791-797.
De Forest PR, Gaensslen RE, Lee HC. Forensic Science: An Introduction to Criminalistics. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1983.
Fisher BA. Techniques of Crime Scene Investigation. 7th ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2004.
Saferstein R. Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Science. 11th ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education; 2015.
Blum LJ, Esperança P, Rocquefelte S. Luminol electrochemiluminescence with screen-printed electrodes for low-cost disposable hand-held biosensors. Anal Lett. 2004;37(9):1883-1897.
Gross AM, Harris KA, Kaldun GL. The effect of luminol on presumptive tests and DNA analysis using the polymerase chain reaction. J Forensic Sci. 1999;44(4):837-840. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS14561J
