Opinion - (2022) Volume 7, Issue 5
The distinct imprints of various loops, whorls, and arches left by a finger when it comes into contact with a surface are known as latent fingerprints. Therefore, fingerprints are a reliable form of identification. Over 110 years have passed since the invention of this field of study, which uses fingerprint analysis to identify people, with little advancement. According to SWGFAST, a fingerprint comparison can only lead to one of the following conclusions: identification, exclusion, or inconclusive. Additionally, fingerprint samples include distinct chemical components that might be used to glean important details about the subject or subjects of interest. The extraction of data from the chemical composition of latent impressions involves numerous detection techniques now under investigation. These techniques comprise spectrometry, spectroscopy, and bio-assays/biosensors, among others. The most recent advancements in methods for chemical content-based fingerprint analysis will be covered in this review.
Fingerprint • Spectrometry • Spectroscopy • Bioassay • Biotechnology • Antibody • Biosensor
Latent fingerprints are those that are difficult to notice with the unaided eye and are referred to as the impressions made on a surface by an individual's fingers. Human finger pads have distinctive ridge patterns made up of different arrangements of loops, whorls, and arches that result in these impressions. The friction ridges that emerge on a person's hands' bottoms between the 9th and 24th week of the embryo's development are what give rise to these prints [1]. The process of developing a fingerprint is essentially random, but the likelihood of having specific general patterns may increase or decrease depending on the genes inherited from the parents. Each fingerprint pattern is specific to an individual because the development of the ridges happens so early that the pressure and movement inside the womb would change the patterns. Since it is unlikely that both of these conditions are the same for different embryos, this makes each fingerprint pattern unique. As a result, even between siblings and twins, the overall fingerprint patterns vary from finger to finger and person to person [2].
This finding leads to the usage of fingerprints as a form of identification. Even though the variations in fingerprints had been noticed for a long time, Dr. Henry Faulds did not come up with the notion of using them to identify offenders until 1880. In 1903, the US introduced the first national fingerprinting system. Since its inception as a method of identification, fingerprint analysis has developed into a potent instrument in forensic science and has gained widespread acceptance around the globe. But this kind of study has not made much progress in recent years. There are currently no definite rules for identification using merely pictorial comparison, making fingerprint comparison a time-consuming operation that requires a professional to assess various fingerprint traits.
Three possible outcomes for fingerprint analysis are listed in SWGFAST guidelines: identification, exclusion, or inconclusive. Even with these classifications, incorrect identifications and exclusions are likely to happen because professional fingerprint analysis is very subjective, particularly in light of the lack of formal numerical thresholds to govern the process [3].
Although efforts have been made to develop a more precise and consistent procedure for comparing fingerprints, the final product still primarily relies on an expert's judgement. Bruce Comber developed a mathematical test to increase the objectivity of fingerprint analysis. This test was able to correct an inaccurate identification that was first made by a Certified Latent Print Examiner by using calculations that accounted for organic skin deformities. Despite the fact that the test was successful in making fingerprint comparison more accurate, it does not entirely eliminate the subjectivity of fingerprint analysis. It also doesn't help much in situations where there are only smudged or imperfect prints available for comparison [4].
It also doesn't help much in situations where there are only smudged or imperfect prints available for comparison. An automated system called AFIS (Automated Fingerprint Identification System) was created to both store and match prints using intricate algorithms in an effort to lessen the burden on expert examiners. This algorithm can compare millions of fingerprints that have been gathered over the years in a much less time than it would take a fingerprint specialist. When there are no specific suspicious matches, this storage system is quite helpful. However, this system's comparison software is not perfect, and it eventually needs human verification [5].
Tenprint comparisons are the only fully automated fingerprint comparisons that AFIS is capable of performing (images of all 10 fingerprints). Tenprints are the complete, undamaged fingerprints that are obtained using ink during fingerprinting from all ten fingers of a person [6]. Even automated tenprint matching is only possible in a few states in the US, though, as stillest demand verification by a professional examiner. Most of the latent prints that are acquired are either smudged or fragmentary, which makes matching much more difficult than comparing sets of carefully collected tenprints, which is the main reason for the limits of this automated procedure. The comparison of fingerprints for identifying purposes still relies on human practitioners and is therefore subject to error, despite the use of many models and methods [7]. The requirement for analytical techniques that can extract information from the chemical substances present in the fingerprints has increased due to the wide margin of error and the numerous instances where the results of fingerprint analysis are declared inconclusive. The recent increase in spectrometry and spectroscopy-based fingerprint analysis research serves to highlight this [8].
The fingerprint's image is less of a focus in these recent research than the molecules that make up the image. This usually refers to the little amounts of perspiration and sebum that are generated by glands in the fingertips. These components contain substances like triglycerides, wax esters, squalene, cholesterol, and various amino acids, among others. The study of these substances can be used to ascertain a person's physical characteristics because the hormone system in the body regulates the gland discharges. It is thought that the secretions that make up a person's fingerprints are an accurate representation of the numerous circumstances and features that person possesses because the production of different hormones is influenced by specific physical traits like biological sex and age [9].
Mass spectrometry, spectroscopy, nanotechnology, and bioassays are the four main areas of current study in fingerprint analysis. It is clear from the diversity of instances in this study that these research' specific foci include the viewing of the fingerprint, the identification of endogenous substances, and the analysis of both endogenous and foreign substances found in latent prints. Numerous endogenous substances found in fingerprints have been initially quantified using mass spectrometry, and fingerprints have also undergone chemical examination.
Although there are quite a few different mass spectrometry methods available, the techniques' portability and viability remain issues. Although portable mass spectrometers are available, the equipment is still heavy and massive, making it impractical to bring one to all or even most crime scenes. Since fingerprints discovered on walls, tables, and other big surfaces cannot be evaluated as is, many of the research did not use fingerprint samples moved from other surfaces, raising doubts about the practicality of the methodology. Another instrumental approach, spectroscopy, has been applied for a variety of purposes. It has been used, like spectrometry, to identify the constituents and sources of fingerprint excretions. However, spectroscopy is more effective in finding explosives and molecules that are connected to them than fingerprinting. This method is suitable for fingerprint analysis since it may be applied to prints that have been altered by different powders and tapes without the need for additional processing. Recent research has demonstrated the value of Raman spectroscopy, and with the availability of portable Raman spectrometers, this method has the potential to be a very formidable tool for fingerprint analysis. While spectrometry and spectroscopy research has worked to develop more useful methodologies, both spectrometry and spectroscopy still call for expensive equipment that necessitates a certain level of scientific experience for data interpretation.
Research involving nanoparticles and antibodies has been prompted by the desire for more functionality and smaller gadgets. Inconvenient for fingerprint samples encountered in the majority of crime scene locations, some nanoparticle-based research still calls for the fingerprint samples to be on movable surfaces for immersing and other preliminary activities. However, certain approaches of employing nanoparticles have shown to be an effective substitute for common fingerprint powders. Latent prints can now be found on surfaces that are resistant to typical fingerprint powders by combining nanoparticles with different chemicals or reagents. Studies on antibodies have also demonstrated their efficacy in identifying certain compounds present in fingerprints, both singly and in combination with other substances.
Each method discussed in this paper has benefits and drawbacks, but none of them has advanced to the point where on-site fingerprint analysis or detection is realistic. The ultimate goal of this kind of study is to create techniques for classifying and analysing various fingerprint components while also making it as quick, simple, and affordable as possible. Although a wide range of approaches are continuously being investigated and created, there are still surprisingly few on-site procedures for fingerprint analysis. Compounds that are exogenous and endogenous to fingerprint content can be recognised and quantified with growing ease and accuracy thanks to the advancement of currently available lab-based procedures.
This does not, however, eliminate the need for on-site methods that can ideally be carried out by people with little to no scientific knowledge. Recently, approaches based on nanoparticles and antibodies have demonstrated the promise to be affordable, effective, and portable. This objective has not yet been accomplished. The creation of practical on-site fingerprint analysis methods will enhance numerous clinical and screening procedures used in daily life and give forensics a very powerful instrument.
We thank the patient for allowing the case description.
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Citation: Diaz, S. An Analysis of Fingerprint Trends - Opinion. J. Forensic Pathol.. 2022, 07 (5), 035-036.
Received: 07-Sep-2022, Manuscript No. JFP-22-19433; Editor assigned: 09-Sep-2022, Pre QC No. JFP-22-19433 (PQ); Reviewed: 23-Sep-2022, QC No. JFP-22-19433 (Q); Revised: 28-Sep-2022, Manuscript No. JFP-22-19433 (R); Published: 07-Oct-2022, DOI: 10.35248/2332-2594.22.7(5).341
Copyright: ©2022 Diaz, S. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
