A comparison of statistical models for the analysis of complex forensic DNA profiles

Science and Justice

Volumn 54, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 66-70

  Kelly, Hannah ^a,b   Bright, Jo Anne ^a   Buckleton, John S ^a   Curran, James M ^b  

^a MT ALBERT RESEARCH CENTRE   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Binary model; Continuous model; Drop model; Forensic DNA interpretation

Indexed keywords

ALLELE; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CRIMINAL JUSTICE; DNA DETERMINATION; DRUG MIXTURE; GENOTYPE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

BINARY MODEL; CONTINUOUS MODEL; DROP MODEL; FORENSIC DNA INTERPRETATION;

DNA FINGERPRINTING; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL;

EID: 84892476769     PISSN: 13550306     EISSN: 18764452     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scijus.2013.07.003     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Caddy B., Taylor G., Linacre A. A Review of the Science of Low Template DNA, Analysis 2008.
2. The Forensic Science Regulator Response to Professor Brian Caddy's Review of the Science of Low Template DNA Analysis 2008.
3. Gill P., Sparkes R.L., Pinchin R., Clayton T., Whitaker J.P., Buckleton J.S. Interpreting simple STR mixtures using allelic peak areas. Forensic Science International 1998, 91:41-53.
4. Buckleton J.S., Triggs C.M., Walsh S.J. Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation 2004, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
5. Clayton T., Whitaker J.P., Sparkes R.L., Gill P. Analysis and interpretation of mixed forensic stains using DNA STR profiling. Forensic Science International 1998, 91:55-70.
6. Haned H., Pene L., Sauvage F., Pontier D. The predictive value of the maximum likelihood estimator of the number of contributors to a DNA profile. Forensic Science International. Genetics 2011, 5:281-284.
7. Geddes L. Fallible DNA evidence can mean prison or freedom. New Scientist (1971) 2010, 2774.
8. Paoletti D.R., Doom T.E., Krane C.M., Raymer M.L., Krane D.E. Empirical analysis of the STR profiles resulting from conceptual mixtures. Journal of Forensic Sciences 2005, 50:1361-1366.
9. Geddes L. How DNA creates victims of chance. New Scientist 2010, 207(2774):8-10.
10. Gill P., Brenner C.H., Buckleton J.S., Carracedo A., Krawczak M., Mayr W.R., Morling N., Prinz M., Schneider P.M., Weir B.S. DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: recommendations on the interpretation of mixtures. Forensic Science International 2006, 160:90-101.
11. Evett I.W., Buffery C., Willott G., Stoney D.A. A guide to interpreting single locus profiles of DNA mixtures in forensic cases. Journal of the Forensic Science Society 1991, 31:41-47.
12. Weir B.S., Triggs C.M., Starling L., Stowell L.I., Walsh K.A.J., Buckleton J.S. Interpreting DNA mixtures. Journal of Forensic Sciences 1997, 42:213-222.
13. Curran J.M., Triggs C.M., Buckleton J.S., Weir B.S. Interpreting DNA mixtures in structured populations. Journal of Forensic Sciences 1999, 44:987-995.
14. Beecham G.W., Weir B.S. Confidence interval of the likelihood ratio associated with mixed stain DNA evidence. Journal of Forensic Sciences 2011, 56:S166-S171.
15. Bill M., Gill P., Curran J., Clayton T., Pinchin R., Healy M., Buckleton J. PENDULUM - a guideline based approach to the interpretation of STR mixtures. Forensic Science International 2005, 148:181-189.
16. Applied Biosystems, GeneMapper® ID-X Software Mixture Analysis Tool. Quick Reference Guide http://www3.appliedbiosystems.com/cms/groups/applied_markets_marketing/documents/generaldocuments/cms_087508.pdf.
17. Buckleton J., Triggs C.M. Is the 2p rule always conservative?. Forensic Science International 2006, 159:206-209.
18. Kelly H., Bright J.-A., Curran J., Buckleton J. The interpretation of low level DNA mixtures. Forensic Science International. Genetics 2011, 6:191-197.
19. Gill P., Kirkham A., Curran J. LoComatioN: a software tool for the analysis of low copy number DNA profiles. Forensic Science International 2007, 166:128-138.
20. Haned H. Forensim: an open-source initiative for the evaluation of statistical methods in forensic genetics. Forensic Science International. Genetics 2011, 5:265-268.
21. Balding D. likeLTD (likelihoods for low-template DNA profiles) https://sites.google.com/site/baldingstatisticalgenetics/software/likeltd-r-forensic-dna-r-code.
22. Balding D.J., Buckleton J. Interpreting low template DNA profiles. Forensic Science International. Genetics 2009, 4:1-10.
23. Gill P., Whitaker J.P., Flaxman C., Brown N., Buckleton J.S. An investigation of the rigor of interpretation rules for STR's derived from less that 100pg of DNA. Forensic Science International 2000, 112:17-40.
24. Buckleton J.S., Gill P. Low copy number. Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation 2004, 275-297. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
25. Gill P., Gusmão L., Haned H., Mayr W.R., Morling N., Parson W., Prieto L., Prinz M., Schneider H., Schneider P.M., Weir B.S. DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: Recommendations on the evaluation of STR typing results that may include drop-out and/or drop-in using probabilistic methods. Forensic Science International. Genetics 2012, 6:679-688.
26. Tvedebrink T., Eriksen P.S., Mogensen H.S., Morling N. Estimating the probability of allelic drop-out of STR alleles in forensic genetics. Forensic Science International. Genetics 2009, 3:222-226.
27. Tvedebrink T., Eriksen P.S., Mogensen H.S., Morling N. Statistical model for degraded DNA samples and adjusted probabilities for allelic drop-out. Forensic Science International. Genetics 2012, 6:97-101.
28. Balding D. Integrating D, Personal Communication 2010.
29. Perlin M.W., Legler M.M., Spencer C.E., Smith J.L., Allan W.P., Belrose J.L., Duceman B.W. Validating TrueAllele® DNA mixture interpretation. Journal of Forensic Sciences 2011, 56:1430-1447.
30. Perlin M.W. Easy reporting of hard DNA: computer comfort in the courtroom. Forensic Magazine 2012, 9:32-37.
31. Cybergenetics, DNA identification for scientists http://www.cyben.com/information/courses/page.shtml.
32. Perlin M.W. DNA identification science. Forensic Sciences 2012, LexisNexis Matthew Bender, Albany. C.H. Wecht (Ed.).
33. Perlin M.W., Sinelnikov A. An information gap in DNA evidence interpretation. PLoS One 2009, 4:e8327.
34. Curran J. A MCMC method for resolving two person mixtures. Science & Justice 2008, 48:168-177.
35. Pascali V.L., Merigioli S. Joint Bayesian analysis of forensic mixtures. Forensic Science International. Genetics 2012, 6:735-748.
36. Ballantyne J., Hanson E.K., Perlin M.W. DNA mixture genotyping by probabilistic computer interpretation of binomially-sampled laser captured cell populations: combining quantitative data for greater identification information. Science & Justice 2013, 53(2):103-114.
37. Perlin M.W., Galloway J. Computer DNA evidence interpretation in the Real IRA Massereene terrorist attack. Evidence Technology Magazine 2012, 10:20-23.