Literature DB >> 19368620

Mixture interpretation: defining the relevant features for guidelines for the assessment of mixed DNA profiles in forensic casework.

Bruce Budowle1, Anthony J Onorato, Thomas F Callaghan, Angelo Della Manna, Ann M Gross, Richard A Guerrieri, Jennifer C Luttman, David Lee McClure.   

Abstract

Currently in the United States there is little direction for what constitutes sufficient guidelines for DNA mixture interpretation. While a standardized approach is not possible or desirable, more definition is necessary to ensure reliable interpretation of results is carried out. In addition, qualified DNA examiners should be able to review reports and understand the assumptions made by the analyst who performed the interpretation. Interpretation of DNA mixture profiles requires consideration of a number of aspects of a mixed profile, many of which need to be established by on-site, internal validation studies conducted by a laboratory's technical staff, prior to performing casework analysis. The relevant features include: criteria for identification of mixed specimens, establishing detection and interpretation threshold values, defining allele peaks, defining nonallele peaks, identifying artifacts, consideration of tri-allelic patterns, estimating the minimum number of contributors, resolving components of a mixture, determining when a portion of the mixed profile can be treated as a single source profile, consideration of potential additive effects of allele sharing, impact of stutter peaks on interpretation in the presence of a minor contributor, comparison with reference specimens, and some issues related to the application of mixture calculation statistics. Equally important is using sensible judgment based on sound and documented principles of DNA analyses. Assumptions should be documented so that reliable descriptive information is conveyed adequately concerning that mixture and what were the bases for the interpretations that were carried out. Examples are provided to guide the community. Interpretation guidelines also should incorporate strategies to minimize potential bias that could occur by making inferences based on a reference sample. The intent of this paper is to promote more thought, provide assistance on many aspects for consideration, and to support that more formalized mixture interpretation guidelines are developed.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19368620     DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01046.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Forensic Sci        ISSN: 0022-1198            Impact factor:   1.832


  22 in total

Review 1.  Separation/extraction, detection, and interpretation of DNA mixtures in forensic science (review).

Authors:  Ruiyang Tao; Shouyu Wang; Jiashuo Zhang; Jingyi Zhang; Zihao Yang; Xiang Sheng; Yiping Hou; Suhua Zhang; Chengtao Li
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2018-05-25       Impact factor: 2.686

2.  Short-read, high-throughput sequencing technology for STR genotyping.

Authors:  Daniel M Bornman; Mark E Hester; Jared M Schuetter; Manjula D Kasoji; Angela Minard-Smith; Curt A Barden; Scott C Nelson; Gene D Godbold; Christine H Baker; Boyu Yang; Jacquelyn E Walther; Ivan E Tornes; Pearlly S Yan; Benjamin Rodriguez; Ralf Bundschuh; Michael L Dickens; Brian A Young; Seth A Faith
Journal:  Biotech Rapid Dispatches       Date:  2012-04

3.  The forensic value of X-linked markers in mixed-male DNA analysis.

Authors:  HaiJun He; Lagabaiyila Zha; JinHong Cai; Jian Huang
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 2.686

4.  13-loci STR multiplex system for Brazilian seized samples of marijuana: individualization and origin differentiation.

Authors:  Mauro Sander Fett; Roberta Fogliatto Mariot; Eduardo Avila; Clarice Sampaio Alho; Valdir Marcos Stefenon; Flávio Anastácio de Oliveira Camargo
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 2.686

5.  Evaluation of two 13-loci STR multiplex system regarding identification and origin discrimination of Brazilian Cannabis sativa samples.

Authors:  Lucas de Oliveira Pereira Ribeiro; Eduardo Avila; Roberta Fogliatto Mariot; Mauro Sander Fett; Flávio Anastácio de Oliveira Camargo; Clarice Sampaio Alho
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 2.686

6.  An information gap in DNA evidence interpretation.

Authors:  Mark W Perlin; Alexander Sinelnikov
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-12-16       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Detection and analysis of the cause of false-tetra-allelic patterns of locus D10S1435 at the sequence level.

Authors:  Yongsong Zhou; Qiong Lan; Yating Fang; Yuxin Guo; Tong Xie; Weian Du; Bofeng Zhu
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 2.686

8.  Forensic trace DNA: a review.

Authors:  Roland Ah van Oorschot; Kaye N Ballantyne; R John Mitchell
Journal:  Investig Genet       Date:  2010-12-01

9.  Estimating the number of contributors to two-, three-, and four-person mixtures containing DNA in high template and low template amounts.

Authors:  Jaheida Perez; Adele A Mitchell; Nubia Ducasse; Jeannie Tamariz; Theresa Caragine
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.351

10.  Lab Retriever: a software tool for calculating likelihood ratios incorporating a probability of drop-out for forensic DNA profiles.

Authors:  Keith Inman; Norah Rudin; Ken Cheng; Chris Robinson; Adam Kirschner; Luke Inman-Semerau; Kirk E Lohmueller
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.