| Title |
Laundry in a washing machine as a mediator of secondary and tertiary DNA transfer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Legal Medicine, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00414-017-1617-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lev Voskoboinik, Merav Amiel, Ayeleth Reshef, Ron Gafny, Mark Barash |
| Abstract |
The aim of this work was to investigate the possibility of secondary and tertiary DNA transfer during laundry. The modes of transfer tested were mixed and separate laundry of worn and unworn garments in household and public washing machines. In addition, the possibility of a background DNA carry-over from a washing machine's drum was investigated. In the mixed (worn and unworn garments washed together) laundry experiment, 22% of samples from new unworn socks with no traceable DNA prior to experiment produced DNA profiles post-laundry. In the tertiary DNA transfer experiment performed in a public washing machine (unworn garments only), no detectable DNA profiles were observed. Samples collected from the internal drum of 25 washing and drying machines did not produce detectable STR profiles. The implications of these results are discussed in the context of forensic DNA casework analysis. Graphical Abstract ᅟA real-life scenario of secondary DNA transfer between worn and unworn garments during machine washing has been evaluated. Experiments demonstrated this scenario is possible (22% of samples) and may in fact result in high quality DNA profiles. On the contrary, testing washing machine's interior for deposition of biological material between separate washing cycles to serve as a mediator of tertiary DNA transfer resulted in no DNA profiles. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 21 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 26 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2019.
All research outputs
#15,419,573
of 24,911,633 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#802
of 2,219 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,141
of 322,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#12
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,911,633 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,219 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.