U. COLORADO (US)—Forensic scientists may soon be able to identify individuals using types of hand bacteria left behind on objects like keyboards and computer mice.
A study examining the new technique shows that “personal” bacterial communities living on the fingers and palms of individual computer users that were deposited on keyboards and mice matched the bacterial DNA signatures of users much more closely than those of random people.
While the development of the technique is continuing, it could provide a way for forensics experts to independently confirm the accuracy of DNA and fingerprint analyses, says chief author of the study Noah Fierer, an assistant professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
“Each one of us leaves a unique trail of bugs behind as we travel through our daily lives,” says Fierer. “While this project is still in it’s preliminary stages, we think the technique could eventually become a valuable new item in the toolbox of forensic scientists.”
The study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Using powerful gene-sequencing techniques, the team swabbed bacterial DNA from individual keys on three personal computers and matched them up to bacteria on the fingertips of keyboard owners, comparing the results to swabs taken from other keyboards never touched by the subjects.
The bacterial DNA from the keys matched much more closely to bacteria of keyboard owners than to bacterial samples taken from random fingertips and from other keyboards, Fierer says.
In a second test, the team swabbed nine keyboard mice that had not been touched in more than 12 hours and collected palm bacteria from the mouse owners. The team compared the similarity between the owner’s palm bacteria and owner’s mouse with 270 randomly selected bacterial samples from palms that had never touched the mouse. In all nine cases, the bacterial community on each mouse was much more similar to the owner’s hand.
The team sampled private and public computers at CU-Boulder, as well as hand bacteria collected from a variety of volunteers on campus. The study showed the new technique is about 70 to 90 percent accurate, a percentage that likely will rise as the technology becomes more sophisticated, notes Fierer.
In an effort to see how persistent the bacteria colonies were, the team also swabbed the skin surfaces of two individuals, freezing one set of samples at minus 4 degrees Fahrenheit and leaving the other room temperature. The results showed room-temperature bacterial colonies remained essentially unchanged after two weeks, pointing up the technique’s potential as a forensic tool.
“That finding was a real surprise to us,” says Fierer. “We didn’t know just how hearty these creatures were.”
Previous research by Fierer and his colleagues—which indicated a typical hand carries about 150 bacterial species—also showed only 13 percent of bacteria species found a single hand were shared by any two people. “The obvious question then was whether we could identify objects that have been touched by particular individuals,” Fierer says.
The CU-Boulder team used a “metagenomic” survey to simultaneously analyze all of the bacteria on the fingers, palms and computer equipment, says team member Rob Knight, an assistant professor of chemistry and biochemistry. The effort involved isolating and amplifying tiny bits of microbial DNA, then building complementary DNA strands with a high-powered sequencing machine that allowed the team to identify different families, genera and species of bacteria from the sample.
“This is something we couldn’t have done even two years ago,” adds Fierer. “Right now we can sequence bacterial DNA from 450 samples at once, and we think the number will be up to 1,000 by next year. And as the cost of the technology continues to drop, even smaller labs could undertake these types of projects.”
Another reason the new technique may prove valuable to forensic experts is that unless there is blood, tissue, semen, or saliva on an object, it’s often difficult to obtain sufficient human DNA for forensic identification, says Fierer. But given the abundance of bacterial cells on the skin surface, it may be easier to recover bacterial DNA than human DNA from touched surfaces. “Our technique could provide another independent line of evidence.”
More research needs to done on how human bacterial signatures adhere to different surfaces like metal, plastic and glass, notes Fierer. But the new technique may be useful for linking objects to users in cases where clear fingerprints cannot be obtained—from smudged surfaces, fabrics, and highly textured materials, he says. The new technique would even be useful for identifying objects touched by identical twins, since they share identical DNA but they have different bacterial communities on their hands.
The study was funded by the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
University of Colorado news: www.colorado.edu/news/