Presented at the 61st Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, February 16–21, 2009, in Denver, CO.
The Evaluation of Human Hand Odor Volatiles on Various Textiles: A Comparison Between Contact and Noncontact Sampling Methods
Article first published online: 11 APR 2011
© 2011 American Academy of Forensic Sciences
Journal of Forensic Sciences
Volume 56, Issue 4, pages 866–881, July 2011
How to Cite
Prada, P. A., Curran, A. M. and Furton, K. G. (2011), The Evaluation of Human Hand Odor Volatiles on Various Textiles: A Comparison Between Contact and Noncontact Sampling Methods. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 56: 866–881. doi: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01762.x
Support in the form of a contract was obtained from Technical Support Working Group (TSWG).
- Issue published online: 5 JUL 2011
- Article first published online: 11 APR 2011
- Received 23 Dec. 2009; and in revised form 29 June 2010; accepted 10 July 2010.
- forensic science;
- human scent collection;
- fiber chemistries;
- Scent Transfer Unit (STU-100);
- contact and noncontact methods
Abstract: The focus of this study is to compare contact and noncontact human scent collection procedures across an array of textiles (cotton, rayon, polyester, and wool) to determine an optimized collection method for human scent evidence. Six subjects were sampled in triplicate for each textile and collection mode, and the samples were then analyzed through headspace solid-phase micro-extraction in combination with gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (SPME-GC/MS). Contact sampling with cotton material has been shown to be the collection method that yielded the greatest number of volatile compounds and the highest scent mass amounts. Through Spearman rank correlations, it was shown that an individual’s scent profile is more reproducible within samples collected on the same textile type than between different materials. Furthermore, contact sampling with cotton fabric demonstrated the greatest reproducibility producing the lowest amount of type I and type II errors with 90.85% of the samples distinguished at the 0.9 match/no match threshold.