Forensic potential of toothbrush derived DNA: A narrative review on human identification
Main Article Content
Abstract
Human identification is a cornerstone of forensic science, encompassing both the confirmation of unknown individuals and the linkage of biological material to known persons. Although DNA profiling remains the gold standard for individual identification due to its exceptional discriminatory power, its application is frequently constrained by the unavailability of direct reference samples. This limitation has driven growing interest in alternative DNA sources derived from personal items encountered in daily life. Among these, the toothbrush has received particular attention, as its bristles routinely retain buccal epithelial cells and salivary residues that may yield sufficient human DNA for forensic profiling. This narrative review synthesizes the available literature on the use of toothbrushes as a DNA source within the context of forensic personal identification, with specific attention to extraction methodologies, factors influencing DNA recovery including toothpaste-mediated PCR inhibition, rinsing intensity, storage duration, and oral health status. The review further addresses the potential interference of the oral microbiome, the forensic challenges posed by mixed DNA profiles and secondary transfer, the applicability of contemporary techniques including massively parallel sequencing and probabilistic genotyping, and the integration of toothbrush-derived DNA into disaster victim identification protocols. Although complete and interpretable short tandem repeat profiles have been obtained across multiple studies, the primary evidence base remains limited to a small number of studies with heterogeneous methodologies and modest sample sizes. Standardized collection and extraction protocols have not yet been established. Future research should prioritize inter-laboratory validation, the systematic evaluation of oral health variables, and the integration of toothbrush sampling into evidence-based forensic frameworks.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Kanchan T, Krishan K. Personal identification in forensic examinations. Anthropol. 2013;2(1):114. doi: 10.4172/2332-0915.1000114.
Sweet D, Lorente JA, Valenzuela A, Lorente M, Villanueva E. PCR-based DNA typing of saliva stains recovered from human skin. J Forensic Sci. 1997 May;42(3):447-451.
Ballantyne J. Mass disaster genetics. Nat Genet. 1997 Apr;15(4):329-331. doi: 10.1038/ng0497-329.
Pretty IA, Sweet D. A look at forensic dentistry—Part 1: The role of teeth in the determination of human identity. Br Dent J. 2001 Apr;190(7):359–366. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4800972.
Pretty IA. Forensic dentistry: 1. Identification of human remains. Dent Update. 2007 Dec;34(10):621–630. doi: 10.12968/denu.2007.34.10.621.
Girish K, Rahman FS, Tippu SR. Dental DNA fingerprinting in identification of human remains. J Forensic Dent Sci. 2010 Jul;2(2):63–68. doi: 10.4103/0975-1475.81284.
de Boer HH, Obertová Z, Cunha E, Adalian P, Baccino E, Fracasso T, et al. Strengthening the role of forensic anthropology in personal identification: position statement by the board of the forensic anthropology society of Europe (FASE). Forensic Sci Int. 2020 Oct;315:110456. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110456.
Jobling MA, Gill P. Encoded evidence: DNA in forensic analysis. Nat Rev Genet. 2004 Oct;5(10):739–751. doi: 10.1038/nrg1455.
Sharma AK. DNA profiling: social, legal, or biological parentage. Indian J Hum Genet. 2007 Sep;13(3):88-92. doi: 10.4103/0971-6866.38981.
Jobim MR, Gamio F, Ewald G, Jobim M, Jobim LF. Human identification using DNA purified from residues in used toothbrushes. Int Congr Ser. 2004 Jun;1261:491–493. doi: 10.1016/j.ics.2003.11.013.
Tanaka M, Yoshimoto T, Nozawa H, Ohtaki H, Kato Y, Sato K, et al. Usefulness of a toothbrush as a source of evidential DNA for typing. J Forensic Sci. 2000 May;45(3):674–676.
Sujatha G, Priya VV, Dubey A, Mujoo S, Sulimany AM, Omar Tawhari AM, et al. Toothbrushes as a source of DNA for gender and human identification-a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Oct ;18(21):11182. doi: 10.3390/ijerph182111182.
Torres-Pérez AG, López-Armenta M, Villavicencio-Queijeiro A. DNA profiles from biological trace material contained in underwear and toothbrushes. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Ser. 2022 Oct;8:232–233. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigss.2022.10.045.
Bandhaya A, Panvisavas N. Optimization of DNA recovery from toothbrushes. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Ser. 2008 Sep;1:9–10. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigss.2007.10.053.
Riemer LB, Fairley D, Sweet D. DNA collection from used toothbrushes as a means to decedent identification. Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 2012 Dec;33(4):354-356. doi: 10.1097/PAF.0b013e318221be52.
Vajpayee K, Dash HR, Parekh PB, Shukla RK. PCR inhibitors and facilitators—their role in forensic DNA analysis. Forensic Sci Int. 2023 Aug;349:111773. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2023.111773.
Sidstedt M, Rådström P, Hedman J. PCR inhibition in qPCR, dPCR and MPS—mechanisms and solutions. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2020 Apr;412(9):2009–2023. doi:10.1007/s00216-020-02490-2.
Alfadaly N, Kassab A, Al Hedaithy F. Determination of DNA profiling of siwak and toothbrush samples used in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Egypt J Med Hum Genet. 2016 Oct;17(4):383–387. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmhg.2016.02.007.
Alqarni A, Shamsudeen SM, Mannakandath ML, Asif SM, Alassiri S, Assiri KI. Comparison of gender identification using exfoliated cells obtained from toothbrush and miswak: a longitudinal study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Jun;103(23):e38401. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000038401.
Schreck JH, Lashaki MJ, Hashemi J, Dhanak M, Verma S. Aerosol generation in public restrooms. Phys Fluids. 2021 Mar;33(3):033320. doi: 10.1063/5.0040310.
Butler JM. Recent advances in forensic biology and forensic DNA typing: INTERPOL review 2019-2022. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2022 Dec;6:100311. doi: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2022.100311.
Carratto TMT, Moraes VMS, Recalde TSF, Oliveira MLG, Teixeira Mendes-Junior C. Applications of massively parallel sequencing in forensic genetics. Genet Mol Biol. 2022 Sep;45(3 Suppl 1):e20220077. doi: 10.1590/1678-4685-GMB-2022-0077.
Browne T, Freeman M. Next generation sequencing: forensic applications and policy considerations. WIREs Forensic Sci. 2024;6(6):e1531. doi: 10.1002/wfs2.1531.
Romsos EL, Moreno LI, Hares DR. Results of the 2023 Rapid DNA multi-laboratory study—RapidINTEL Plus sample cartridge. Forensic Sci Int Rep. 2024;10:100396. doi: 10.1016/j.fsir.2024.100396.
International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL). Disaster victim identification guide Lyon (France): INTERPOL; 2023 Nov.
Siddiqui R, Badran Z, Boghossian A, Alharbi AM, Alfahemi H, Khan NA. The increasing importance of the oral microbiome in periodontal health and disease. Future Sci OA. 2023 Jun;9(8):FSO856. doi: 10.2144/fsoa-2023-0062.
Nema V. Microbial forensics: beyond a fascination. In: DNA fingerprinting: advancements and future endeavors. Singapore: Springer; 2018. p. 295–306.
Abusleme L, Hong BY, Dupuy AK, Strausbaugh LD, Diaz PI. Influence of DNA extraction on oral microbial profiles obtained via 16S rRNA gene sequencing. J Oral Microbiol. 2014 Apr;6:23990. doi: 10.3402/jom.v6.23990.
Procopio N, Lovisolo F, Sguazzi G, Ghignone S, Voyron S, Migliario M, et al. “Touch microbiome” as a potential tool for forensic investigation: a pilot study. J Forensic Leg Med. 2021 Aug;82:102223. doi: 10.1016/j.jflm.2021.102223.
Cho HW, Eom YB. Forensic analysis of human microbiome in skin and body fluids based on geographic location. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021 Aug;11:695191. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.695191.
Patil S, Rao RS, Majumdar B, Anil S. Clinical appearance of oral Candida infection and therapeutic strategies. Front Microbiol. 2015 Dec;6:1391. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01391.
Vesty A, Biswas K, Taylor MW, Gear K, Douglas RG. Evaluating the impact of DNA extraction method on the representation of human oral bacterial and fungal communities. PLoS One. 2017 Jan;12(1):e0169877. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169877.
Tozzo P, Mazzobel E, Marcante B, Delicati A, Caenazzo L. Touch DNA sampling methods: efficacy evaluation and systematic review. Int J Mol Sci. 2022 Dec;23(24):15541. doi: 10.3390/ijms232415541.
Dror IE, Hampikian J. Subjectivity and bias in forensic DNA mixture interpretation. Sci Justice. 2011 Dec;51(4):204–208. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004.
Butler JM, Iyer H, Press R, Taylor MK, Vallone PM, Willis S. DNA mixture interpretation: a NIST scientific foundation review [Internet]. Gaithersburg (MD): National Institute of Standards and Technology; 2024 [cited ]. (NIST Interagency/Internal Report; No. 8351). Available from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8351
Thompson WC. Uncertainty in probabilistic genotyping of low template DNA: a case study comparing STRMix™ and TrueAllele™. J Forensic Sci. 2023 May;68(3):1049–1063. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.15225.
Home Office. Forensic information databases annual report 2022 to 2023 (accessible) [Internet]. London: Home Office; 2024 Jul 19 [cited ]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/forensic-information-databases-annual-report-2022-to-2023
CNN. Mitchell Gaff's discarded chewing gum helped convict him of two cold case murders [Internet]. CNN; 2026 May 10 [cited ]. Available from: https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/10/us/mitchell-gaff-everett-wa-cold-case
Sujatha G, Priya VV, Varadarajan S. A bibliometric analysis of the published literature related to toothbrush as a source of DNA. World J Dent. 2022 Dec;13(S1):S87–S95. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2103.