MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402819758 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2024-2cnk8

Integrating time since deposition estimation of bloodstains into a DNA profiling workflow: A novel approach using fluorescence spectroscopy

2024· preprint· en· W4402819758 on OpenAlexaff
Colin Elliott, Denina Simmons, Theresa Stotesbury

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicForensic and Genetic Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowProfiling (computer programming)FluorescenceDNA profilingComputer scienceFluorescence spectroscopyDNAComputational biologyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryChromatographyBiologyGeneticsOpticsPhysicsDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining the time since deposition (TSD) of bloodstains is important to establish a timeline and contextualize physical evidence in forensic investigations, while DNA profiling addresses questions of identity and source attribution. Traditionally treated as separate processes, this study integrates TSD estimation into routine DNA profiling by analyzing typically discarded cell lysate (eluates) from spin-column-based DNA extractions. Fluorescence spectroscopy was used to analyze eluates from bloodstains deposited up to 23 months (99 weeks). Two excitation-emission matrices (EEMs) were acquired for each sample and deconvoluted using parallel factor analysis (PARAFAC) to identify individual fluorophores. We identified tryptophan and noted a time-dependent decrease in its corresponding fluorescence. An increase in fluorescence was observed between 400-500 nm as TSD progressed, attributed to an increase in fluorescent oxidation products (FOX) and advanced glycation end products (AGEs). Different chemometric models were then used to estimate TSD from EEM fluorescence data. Boruta feature selection coupled with random forest regression outperformed all other models and achieved high accuracy, with an R2 of 0.993 and root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP) of 2.83 weeks for the full 99-week period, and an R2 of 0.987 and RMSEP of 2.06 weeks for the 1-year timeframe. Comparisons were also made between anticoagulant-free (AC-free) and anticoagulant-treated (AC-treated) bloodstains deposited up to 3 months. We noted differences in fluorescence based on AC treatment, with AC-free blood exhibiting higher FOX and lower AGE fluorescence than AC-treated blood. A temperature study was also performed using bloodstains deposited at -18 ºC, 4 ºC and 21 ºC, with the strongest FOX and AGE fluorescence recorded at 21 ºC. Our findings demonstrate the effectiveness and feasibility of integrating TSD estimation into routine forensic DNA analyses while maintaining high prediction accuracies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicForensic and Genetic ResearchFrench-language works237,207