Developmental validation of STRmix™, expert software for the interpretation of forensic DNA profiles

Forensic Science International: Genetics

Volumn 23, Issue , 2016, Pages 226-239

  Bright, Jo Anne ^a   Taylor, Duncan ^b,c   McGovern, Catherine ^a   Cooper, Stuart ^a   Russell, Laura ^a   Abarno, Damien ^b   Buckleton, John ^a  

^a MT ALBERT RESEARCH CENTRE   (New Zealand)

^b FORENSIC SCIENCE SA   (Australia)

^c FLINDERS UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Continuous method; DNA mixtures; Probabilistic genotyping; STRmix; Validation

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ALLELE; ARTICLE; CAPILLARY ELECTROPHORESIS; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DNA DETERMINATION; DNA FINGERPRINTING; DNA TEMPLATE; FORENSIC GENETICS; GENE FREQUENCY; GENOTYPE; HUMAN; MARKOV CHAIN; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; MONTE CARLO METHOD; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; POPULATION GENETICS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STRMIX SOFTWARE; VALIDATION STUDY; SOFTWARE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

MICROSATELLITE DNA;

DNA FINGERPRINTING; GENOTYPE; HUMANS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MICROSATELLITE REPEATS; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84971300427     PISSN: 18724973     EISSN: 18780326     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.05.007     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM). Guidelines for the Validation of Probabilistic Genotyping Systems. 2015.
2. B. Budowle, A.J. Onorato, T.F. Callagham, A.D. Manna, A.M. Gross, R.A. Guerreri, and et al. Mixture Interpretation: defining the relevant features for guidelines for the assessment of mixed DNA profiles in forensic casework J. Forensic Sci. 54 2009 810 821
3. P. Gill, and J. Buckleton Commentary on: Budowle B, Onorato AJ, Callaghan TF, della Manna A, Gross AM, Guerrieri RA, Luttman JC, McClure DL, Mixture interpretation: Defining the relevant features for guidelines for the assessment of mixed DNA profiles in forensic casework [J. Forensic Sci. 2009, 54 (4), 810-821] J. Forensic Sci. 55 2010 265 268
4. J.S. Buckleton, C.M. Triggs, and S.J. Walsh DNA Evidence 2004 CRC Press Boca Raton, Florida
5. I.E. Dror, D. Charlton, and A.E. Peron Contextual information renders experts vulnerable to making erroneous identifications Forensic Sci. Int. 156 2006 74 78
6. W.C. Thompson Painting the target around the matching profile: the Texas sharpshooter fallacy in forensic DNA interpretation Law Law Probab. Risk 8 2009 257 276
7. Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM). SWGDAM Interpretation Guidelines for Autosomal STR Typing by Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories. 2010.
8. P. Gill, C.H. Brenner, J.S. Buckleton, A. Carracedo, M. Krawczak, W.R. Mayr, and et al. DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: recommendations on the interpretation of mixtures Forensic Sci. Int. 160 2006 90 101
9. H. Haned Forensim: an open-source initiative for the evaluation of statistical methods in forensic genetics Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 5 2011 265 268
10. H. Haned, and P. Gill Analysis of complex DNA mixtures using the Forensim package Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. Suppl. Ser. 3 2011 e79 e80
11. D.J. Balding, and J. Buckleton Interpreting low template DNA profiles Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 4 2009 1 10
12. K. Lohmueller, and N. Rudin Calculating the weight of evidence in low-template forensic DNA casework J. Forensic Sci. 58 s1 2013 s234 59
13. A.A. Mitchell, J. Tamariz, K. O'Connell, N. Ducasse, Z. Budimlija, M. Prinz, and et al. Validation of a DNA mixture statistics tool incorporating allelic drop-out and drop-in Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 6 2012 749 761
14. D. Taylor, J.-A. Bright, and J. Buckleton The interpretation of single source and mixed DNA profiles Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 7 2013 516 528
15. FBI Quality Assurance Standards for Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories. 2011.
16. J.-A. Bright, D. Taylor, J.M. Curran, and J.S. Buckleton Developing allelic and stutter peak height models for a continuous method of DNA interpretation Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 7 2013 296 304
17. J.-A. Bright, D. Taylor, C. J.M, and J.S. Buckleton Degradation of forensic DNA profiles Aust. J. Forensic Sci. 45 2013 445 449
18. J. Buckleton, H. Kelly, J.-A. Bright, D. Taylor, T. Tvedebrink, and J.M. Curran Utilising allelic dropout probabilities estimated by logistic regression in casework Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 9 2014 9 11
19. R. Puch-Solis A dropin peak height model Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 11 2014 80 84
20. C. Brookes, J.-A. Bright, S. Harbison, and J. Buckleton Characterising stutter in forensic STR multiplexes Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 6 2012 58 63
21. J.-A. Bright, J.M. Curran, and J.S. Buckleton Investigation into the performance of different models for predicting stutter Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 7 2013 422 427
22. W.K. Hastings Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications Biometrika 57 1970 97 109
23. N. Metropolis, A.W. Rosenbluth, M.N. Rosenbluth, A.H. Teller, and E. Teller Equations of state calculations by fast computing machines J. Chem. Phys. 21 1953 1087 1091
24. D.J. Balding, and R.A. Nichols DNA profile match probability calculation: how to allow for population stratification, relatedness, database selection and single bands Forensic Sci. Int. 64 1994 125 140
25. National Research Council Report: The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence 1996 National Academy Press Washington DC
26. D. Taylor, J.-A. Bright, and J. Buckleton Considering relatives when assessing the evidential strength of mixed DNA profiles Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 13 2014 259 263
27. J.-A. Bright, D. Taylor, J. Curran, and J. Buckleton Searching mixed DNA profiles directly against profile databases Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 9 2014 102 110
28. D. Taylor, J.A. Bright, J. Buckleton, and J. Curran An illustration of the effect of various sources of uncertainty on DNA likelihood ratio calculations Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 11 2014 56 63
29. C.M. Triggs, and J.M. Curran The sensitivity of the Bayesian HPD method to the choice of prior Sci. Justice 46 2006 169 178
30. D. Taylor, J. Buckleton, and J.-A. Bright Factors affecting peak height variability for short tandem repeat data Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 21 2016 126 133
31. J.-A. Bright, and J.M. Curran Investigation into stutter ratio variability between different laboratories Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 13 2014 79 81
32. H. Kelly, J.-A. Bright, J.S. Buckleton, and J.M. Curran Identifying and modelling the drivers of stutter in forensic DNA profiles Aust. J. Forensic Sci. 46 2013 194 203
33. D. Taylor, J.-A. Bright, C. McGoven, C. Hefford, T. Kalafut, and J. Buckleton Validating multiplexes for use in conjunction with modern interpretation strategies Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 20 2016 6 19
34. J.-A. Bright, K.E. Stevenson, J.M. Curran, and J.S. Buckleton The variability in likelihood ratios due to different mechanisms Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 14 2015 187 190
35. D. Taylor, J.A. Bright, and J. Buckleton The 'factor of two' issue in mixed DNA profiles J. Theor. Biol. 363 2014 300 306
36. D. Taylor, J. Buckleton, and J.-A. Bright Does the use of probabilistic genotyping change the way we should view sub-threshold data? Aust. J. Forensic Sci. 2015 10.1080/00450618.2015.1122082
37. D. Taylor Using continuous DNA interpretation methods to revisit likelihood ratio behaviour Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 11 2014 144 153
38. D. Taylor, J. Buckleton, and I. Evett Testing likelihood ratios produced from complex DNA profiles Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 16 2015 165 171
39. Daubert et al. v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., 509 US 579 (1993). 1993.
40. Kumho Tire Co. Ltd et al. v. Carmichael et al. In: Court USS, editor. 526 US 1371999.
41. J.-A. Bright, J.M. Curran, and J.S. Buckleton The effect of the uncertainty in the number of contributors to mixed DNA profiles on profile interpretation Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 12 2014 208 214
42. G. Dørum, O. Bleka, P. Gill, H. Haned, L. Snipen, S. Sæbø, and et al. Exact computation of the distribution of likelihood ratios with forensic applications Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 9 2014 93 101
43. P. Gill, and H. Haned A new methodological framework to interpret complex DNA profiles using likelihood ratios Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 7 2013 251 263
44. H. Haned, G. Dorum, E. Egeland, and P. Gill On the meaning of the likelihood ratio: is a large number always an indication of strength of evidence? 25th Congress of the International Society for Forensic Genetics Melbourne, Australia 2013
45. M. Kruijver, R. Meester, and K. Slooten p-Values should not be used for evaluating the strength of DNA evidence Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 16 2016 226 231
46. J.-A. Bright, I.W. Evett, D. Taylor, J.M. Curran, and J. Buckleton A series of recommended tests when validating probabilistic DNA profile interpretation software Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 14 2015 125 131
47. A. Gelman, and D.B. Rubin Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences Stat. Sci. 7 1992 457 511
48. A. Gelman, J.B. Carlin, H.S. Stem, and D.B. Rubin Bayesian Data Analysis 1995 Chapman & Hall New York
49. J.-A. Bright, K. McManus, S. Harbison, P. Gill, and J. Buckleton A comparison of stochastic variation in mixed and unmixed casework and synthetic samples Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 6 2012 180 184
50. J.-A. Bright, J. Turkington, and J. Buckleton Examination of the variability in mixed DNA profile parameters for the Identifiler(TM) multiplex Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 4 2009 111 114
51. P. Gill, J. Curran, and K. Elliot A graphical simulation model of the entire DNA process associated with the analysis of short tandem repeat loci Nucleic Acids Res. 33 2005 632 643
52. J. Weusten, and J. Herbergs A stochastic model of the processes in PCR based amplification of STR DNA in forensic applications Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 6 2012 17 25
53. ® Y multiplex kits J. Forensic Sci. 56 2011 181 185
54. R Development Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing 2004 R Foundation for Statistical Computing Vienna, Austria
55. T.W. Bille, S.M. Weitz, M.D. Coble, J.S. Buckleton, and J.-A. Bright Comparison of the performance of different models for the interpretation of low level mixed DNA profiles Electrophoresis 35 2014 3125 3133