Comparisons of familial DNA Database searching strategies

Journal of Forensic Sciences

Volumn 56, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 1448-1456

  Ge, Jianye ^a   Chakraborty, Ranajit ^a   Eisenberg, Arthur ^a   Budowle, Bruce ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

DNA database; Familial searching; Forensic science; Identity By State; Kinship analysis; Likelihood ratio; Moderate stringency match

Indexed keywords

MICROSATELLITE DNA;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DNA FINGERPRINTING; FAMILY; GENE FREQUENCY; GENOTYPE; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; METHODOLOGY; NUCLEIC ACID DATABASE; RACE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

CONTINENTAL POPULATION GROUPS; DATABASES, NUCLEIC ACID; DNA FINGERPRINTING; FAMILY; GENE FREQUENCY; GENOTYPE; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MICROSATELLITE REPEATS; SOFTWARE;

EID: 80055112210     PISSN: 00221198     EISSN: 15564029     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01867.x     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Evett IW. Evaluating DNA profiles in a case where the defence is ''It was my brother.'' J Forensic Sci Soc 1992;32:5-14.
2. Sjerps M, Kloosterman AD. On the consequences of DNA mismatches for close relatives of an excluded suspect. Int J Legal Med 1999;112:176-80.
3. Belin TR, Gjertson DW, Hu M. Summarizing DNA evidence when relatives are possible suspects. J Am Stat Assoc 1997;92(438):706-16.
4. Brookfield JF. The effect of relatives on the likelihood ratio associated with DNA profile evidence in criminal cases. J Forensic Sci Soc 1994;34(3):193-7.
5. Bieber FR, Brenner CH, Lazer D. Finding criminals through DNA of their relatives. Science 2006;312:1315-6.
6. Paoletti DR, Doom TE, Raymer ML, Krane DE. Assessing the implications for close relatives in the event of similar but nonmatching DNA profiles. Jurimetrics J 2006;42:161-75.
7. Reid TM, Baird ML, Reid JP, Lee SC, Lee RF. Use of sibling pairs to determine the familial searching efficiency of forensic databases. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2008;2:340-2.
8. Curran JM, Buckleton J. Effectiveness of familial searches. Sci Justice 2008;48:164-7.
9. Cowen S, Thomson J. A likelihood ratio approach to familial searching of large DNA databases. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2008;1:643-5.
10. Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods Ad Hoc Committee on Partial Matches. SWGDAM Recommendations to the FBI Director on the "Interim Plan for the Release of Information in the Event of a 'Partial Match' at NDIS." Forensic Sci Comm 2009;11(4).
11. Hicks T, Taroni F, Curran JM, Buckleton J, Ribaux O, Castella V. Use of DNA profiles for investigation using a simulated Swiss national DNA database: part I, partial SGM Plus1 profiles. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2010;4(4):232-8.
12. Hicks T, Taroni F, Curran JM, Buckleton J, Castella V, Ribaux O. Use of DNA profiles for investigation using a simulated Swiss national DNA database: part II, statistical and ethical considerations on familial searching. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2010;4(5):316-22.
13. Chakraborty R, Jin L. Determination of relatedness between individuals by DNA fingerprinting. Hum Biol 1993;65:875-95.
14. California Department of Justice, Division of Law Enforcement. DNA Partial Match (Crime Scene DNA Profile to Offender) Policy, 2008, (accessed on August 23, 2010).
15. (accessed on August 23, 2010).
16. Li CC, Sacks L. The derivation of joint distribution and correlation between relatives by the use of stochastic matrices. Biometrics 1954;10:347-60.
17. Thompson EA. The estimation of pairwise relationships. Ann Hum Genet 1975;39:173-88.
18. Ge J, Budowle B, Chakraborty R. Choosing relatives for DNA identification of missing persons. J Forensic Sci 2011;56(s1):S23-8.
19. Ge J, Budowle B, Chakraborty R. DNA identification by pedigree likelihood ratio accommodating population substructure and mutations. Investig Genet 2010;1:8.
20. Weir BS. Matching and partially-matching DNA profiles. Ann Appl Stat 2007;1(2):358-70.
21. Weir BS. The rarity of DNA profiles. J Forensic Sci 2004;49:1009-14.
22. Balding DJ, Nichols RA. DNA profile match probability calculation: how to allow for population stratification, relatedness, database selection and single bands. Forensic Sci Int 1994;64:125-40.
23. Chakraborty R, Schull WJ. A note on the distribution of the number of exclusions to be expected in paternity testing. Am J Hum Genet 1976;28:615-8.
24. Chakraborty R. The distribution of the number of heterozygous loci in an individual in natural populations. Genetics 1981;98:461-6.
25. AABB annual report 2008, (accessed on August 23, 2010).
26. Budowle B, Shea B, Niezgoda S, Chakraborty R. CODIS STR loci data from 41 sample populations. J Forensic Sci 2001;46:453-89.
27. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Correctional populations in United States, 1996, (accessed on August 23, 2010).
28. BBC News. "How police found Gafoor, " 4 July 2003, (accessed on August 23, 2010).
29. Budowle B, Ge J, Aranda X, Planz J, Eisenberg A, Chakraborty R. Texas population substructure and its impact on estimating the rarity of Y STR haplotypes from DNA evidence. J Forensic Sci 2009;54(5):1016-21.
30. Walsh B, Redd A, Hammer M. Joint match probabilities for Y chromosomal and autosomal markers. Forensic Sci Int 2008;174(2):234-8.