Forensic investigation approaches of searching relatives in DNA databases

There are several indirect database searching approaches to identify the potential source of a forensic biological sample. These DNA-based approaches are familial searching, Y-STR database searching, and investigative genetic genealogy (IGG). The first two strategies use forensic DNA databases managed by the government, and the latter uses databases managed by private citizens or companies. Each of these search strategies relies on DNA testing to identify relatives of the donor of the crime scene sample, provided such profiles reside in the DNA database(s). All three approaches have been successfully used to identify the donor of biological evidence, which assisted in solving criminal cases or identifying unknown human remains. This paper describes and compares these approaches in terms of genotyping technologies, searching methods, database structures, searching efficiency, data quality, data security, and costs, and raises some potential privacy and legal considerations for further discussion by stakeholders and scientists. Y-STR database searching and IGG are advantageous since they are able to assist in more cases than familial searching readily identifying distant relatives. In contrast, familial searching can be performed more readily with existing laboratory systems. Every country or state may have its own unique economic, technical, cultural, and legal considerations and should decide the best approach(es) to fit those circumstances. Regardless of the approach, the ultimate goal should be the same: generate investigative leads and solve active and cold criminal cases to public safety, under stringent policies and security practices designed to protect the privacy of its citizenry.

[1]  michel More than 26 million people have taken an at-home ancestry test - e-traces , 2019 .

[2]  Chao Liu,et al.  Future directions of forensic DNA databases , 2014, Croatian medical journal.

[3]  B. Budowle,et al.  How many familial relationship testing results could be wrong? , 2020, PLoS genetics.

[4]  H. Machado,et al.  Ethical Controversies of Familial Searching: The Views of Stakeholders in the United Kingdom and in Poland , 2019, Science, Technology, & Human Values.

[5]  Christophe G. Lambert,et al.  Technical Reproducibility of Genotyping SNP Arrays Used in Genome-Wide Association Studies , 2012, PloS one.

[6]  R. Chakraborty,et al.  Pedigree likelihood ratio for lineage markers , 2011, International Journal of Legal Medicine.

[7]  Alexei Fedorov,et al.  Inference of Distant Genetic Relations in Humans Using “1000 Genomes” , 2015, Genome biology and evolution.

[8]  Amy L McGuire,et al.  Should police have access to genetic genealogy databases? Capturing the Golden State Killer and other criminals using a controversial new forensic technique , 2018, PLoS biology.

[9]  Jessica Roberts,et al.  Forensic genealogy and the power of defaults , 2019, Nature Biotechnology.

[10]  Lay-Keow Ng,et al.  Inferring ethnicity using 15 autosomal STR loci--comparisons among populations of similar and distinctly different physical traits. , 2009, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[11]  M. Kayser Forensic use of Y-chromosome DNA: a general overview , 2017, Human Genetics.

[12]  Douglas R Hares,et al.  Selection and implementation of expanded CODIS core loci in the United States. , 2015, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[13]  Bruce Budowle,et al.  Comparisons of Familial DNA Database Searching Strategies , 2011, Journal of forensic sciences.

[14]  M. Buoncristiani,et al.  Searching for first-degree familial relationships in California's offender DNA database: validation of a likelihood ratio-based approach. , 2011, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[15]  David Lazer,et al.  Finding Criminals Through DNA of Their Relatives , 2006, Science.

[16]  Ó. García,et al.  Suspects identification through “familial searching” in DNA databases of criminal interest. Social, ethical and scientific implications , 2017 .

[17]  S. Chanock,et al.  Successful use of whole genome amplified DNA from multiple source types for high-density Illumina SNP microarrays , 2018, BMC Genomics.

[18]  G. Samuel,et al.  The impact of investigative genetic genealogy: perceptions of UK professional and public stakeholders. , 2020, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[19]  Douglas R Hares,et al.  Expanding the CODIS core loci in the United States. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[20]  Dennis Y. Wang,et al.  Developmental validation of the GlobalFiler(®) Express PCR Amplification Kit: A 6-dye multiplex assay for the direct amplification of reference samples. , 2015, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[21]  Jianye Ge,et al.  Developmental validation of the Yfiler(®) Plus PCR Amplification Kit: An enhanced Y-STR multiplex for casework and database applications. , 2016, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[22]  I W Evett,et al.  Evaluating DNA profiles in a case where the defence is "it was my brother". , 1992, Journal - Forensic Science Society.

[23]  Douglas R Storts,et al.  Developmental validation of the PowerPlex(®) Fusion 6C System. , 2016, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[24]  Ellen M. Greytak,et al.  Privacy and genetic genealogy data , 2018, Science.

[25]  B. Cong,et al.  New genetic sleuthing tool: Forensic genealogy , 2019, Chinese Science Bulletin.

[26]  B Budowle,et al.  STR primer concordance study. , 2001, Forensic science international.

[27]  S. Katsanis Pedigrees and Perpetrators: Uses of DNA and Genealogy in Forensic Investigations. , 2020, Annual review of genomics and human genetics.

[28]  B. Budowle,et al.  Variants observed for STR locus SE33: a concordance study. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[29]  C Phillips,et al.  A genomic audit of newly-adopted autosomal STRs for forensic identification. , 2017, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[30]  Eran Halperin,et al.  Identifying Personal Genomes by Surname Inference , 2013, Science.

[31]  Jianye Ge,et al.  A convenient guideline to determine if two Y‐STR profiles are from the same lineage , 2016, Electrophoresis.

[32]  D. Court Forensic genealogy: Some serious concerns , 2018 .

[33]  M. Larmuseau,et al.  Review of policies of companies and databases regarding access to customers' genealogy data for law enforcement purposes. , 2020, Personalized medicine.

[34]  Greg Miller Forensics. Familial DNA testing scores a win in serial killer case. , 2010, Science.

[35]  Michael D Edge,et al.  Attacks on genetic privacy via uploads to genealogical databases , 2020, eLife.

[36]  Bruce Budowle,et al.  Kinship Index Variations among Populations and Thresholds for Familial Searching , 2012, PloS one.

[37]  Yaniv Erlich,et al.  Identity inference of genomic data using long-range familial searches , 2018, Science.

[38]  H. Gréen,et al.  Whole-genome sequencing of human remains to enable genealogy DNA database searches - A case report. , 2020, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[39]  P. de Knijff,et al.  A new future of forensic Y-chromosome analysis: rapidly mutating Y-STRs for differentiating male relatives and paternal lineages. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[40]  R. Chakraborty,et al.  Mutation rates at Y chromosome short tandem repeats in Texas populations. , 2009, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[41]  Efthymia Karantzali,et al.  The effect of FBI CODIS Core STR Loci expansion on familial DNA database searching. , 2019, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[42]  Josyf Mychaleckyj,et al.  Robust relationship inference in genome-wide association studies , 2010, Bioinform..

[43]  Amy L. McGuire,et al.  Genealogy databases and the future of criminal investigation , 2018, Science.

[44]  Ellen M. Greytak,et al.  Genetic genealogy for cold case and active investigations. , 2019, Forensic science international.

[45]  Bruce Budowle,et al.  Current state‐of‐art of STR sequencing in forensic genetics , 2018, Electrophoresis.

[46]  R. Chakraborty,et al.  Texas Population Substructure and Its Impact on Estimating the Rarity of Y STR Haplotypes from DNA Evidence * , 2009, Journal of forensic sciences.

[47]  Jocelyne Bruand,et al.  Developmental validation of the MiSeq FGx Forensic Genomics System for Targeted Next Generation Sequencing in Forensic DNA Casework and Database Laboratories. , 2017, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[48]  Sascha Willuweit,et al.  The new Y Chromosome Haplotype Reference Database. , 2015, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[49]  US forensic Y-chromosome short tandem repeats database. , 2010, Legal medicine.

[50]  Itsik Pe'er,et al.  Cryptic Distant Relatives Are Common in Both Isolated and Cosmopolitan Genetic Samples , 2012, PloS one.