Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorStreeting, Carl A
dc.contributor.authorChaseling, Janet
dc.contributor.authorKrosch, Matt N
dc.contributor.authorWright, Kirsty
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-16T05:41:17Z
dc.date.available2020-10-16T05:41:17Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn0045-0618en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/00450618.2020.1781256en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/398442
dc.description.abstractPresumptive tests for blood, such as luminol and leucocrystal violet (LCV), are often used by forensic officers when screening for latent (non-visible) or diluted bloodstains at crime scenes. Where positive reactions are observed, a confirmatory test for the presence of blood may be implemented. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of two such confirmatory tests (ABAcard® Hematrace® and RSIDTM-Blood) on dried, diluted bloodstains that were enhanced using either the Grodsky luminol formulation or LCV. Eighteen replicates per dilution (1:10, 1:100), enhancement, and confirmatory test were performed (144 bloodstains). The RSIDTM-Blood test produced false negative results for all luminol-enhanced bloodstains, regardless of dilution. This test performed slightly better for bloodstains enhanced with LCV, returning approximately 50% positive results. In contrast, the ABAcard® Hematrace® test performed well, returning positive detections for all luminol-treated bloodstains, and all but two LCV-enhanced stains (both 1:100 dilution). Significant differences were observed between the test results and suggested a potential inhibitory effect on the RSIDTM-Blood test from the Grodsky luminol formulation and, to a lesser extent, LCV. This research has demonstrated that the RSIDTM-Blood test is not a reliable confirmatory test faint or latent bloodstains enhanced with luminol or LCV.
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis Groupen_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalAustralian Journal of Forensic Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchForensic Biologyen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode069901en_US
dc.subject.keywordsScience & Technologyen_US
dc.subject.keywordsLife Sciences & Biomedicineen_US
dc.subject.keywordsMedicine, Legalen_US
dc.subject.keywordsLegal Medicineen_US
dc.subject.keywordsSensitivityen_US
dc.titleA comparison of ABAcard® Hematrace® and RSIDTM-Blood tests on dried, diluted bloodstains treated with leucocrystal violet or luminolen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articlesen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationStreeting, CA; Chaseling, J; Krosch, MN; Wright, K, A comparison of ABAcard® Hematrace® and RSIDTM-Blood tests on dried, diluted bloodstains treated with leucocrystal violet or luminol, Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 2020en_US
dc.date.updated2020-10-16T05:39:48Z
gro.description.notepublicThis publication has been entered in Griffith Research Online as an advanced online version.en_US
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text
gro.griffith.authorChaseling, Janet


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record