DNA Mixtures in Forensic Investigations: The Statistical State of the Art

Forensic science has experienced a period of rapid change because of the tremendous evolution in DNA profiling. Problems of forensic identification from DNA evidence can become extremely challenging, both logically and computationally, in the presence of complicating features, such as in mixed DNA trace evidence. Additional complicating aspects are possible, such as missing data on individuals, heterogeneous populations, and kinship. In such cases, there is considerable uncertainty involved in determining whether or not the DNA of a given individual is actually present in the sample. We begin by giving a brief introduction to the genetic background needed for understanding forensic DNA mixtures, including the artifacts that commonly occur in the DNA amplification process. We then review different methods and software based on qualitative and quantitative information and give details on a quantitative method that uses Bayesian networks as a computational device for efficiently computing likelihoods. This method allows for the possibility of combining evidence from multiple samples to make inference about relationships from DNA mixtures and other more complex scenarios.

[1]  Julia Mortera,et al.  Analysis of a DNA mixture involving Romani reference populations. , 2019, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[2]  Julia Mortera,et al.  The Yara Gambirasio case: Combining evidence in a complex DNA mixture case. , 2019, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[3]  N. Kaur,et al.  Pedigree-based relationship inference from complex DNA mixtures , 2017, International Journal of Legal Medicine.

[4]  J. Mortera,et al.  Paternity testing and other inference about relationships from DNA mixtures. , 2016, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[5]  J. Mortera,et al.  Paternity testing that involves a DNA mixture. , 2016, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[6]  K. Slooten Familial searching on DNA mixtures with dropout. , 2016, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[7]  Øyvind Bleka,et al.  EuroForMix: An open source software based on a continuous model to evaluate STR DNA profiles from a mixture of contributors with artefacts. , 2016, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[8]  T. Egeland,et al.  Relationship inference based on DNA mixtures , 2016, International Journal of Legal Medicine.

[9]  D. Balding,et al.  Encoding of low-quality DNA profiles as genotype probability matrices for improved profile comparisons, relatedness evaluation and database searches. , 2016, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[10]  Aaron K. LeFebvre,et al.  SNP-microarrays can accurately identify the presence of an individual in complex forensic DNA mixtures. , 2015, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[11]  P. S. Eriksen,et al.  Identifying the most likely contributors to a Y-STR mixture using the discrete Laplace method. , 2015, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[12]  Fabio Corradi,et al.  Evaluation of kinship identification systems based on short tandem repeat DNA profiles , 2013 .

[13]  D. Balding,et al.  Evaluating forensic DNA profiles using peak heights, allowing for multiple donors, allelic dropout and stutters. , 2013, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[14]  Steffen L. Lauritzen,et al.  Computational aspects of DNA mixture analysis , 2013, Statistics and Computing.

[15]  D. Balding Evaluation of mixed-source, low-template DNA profiles in forensic science , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[16]  Therese Graversen,et al.  Analysis of DNA Mixtures with Artifacts , 2013 .

[17]  Duncan Taylor,et al.  Developing allelic and stutter peak height models for a continuous method of DNA interpretation. , 2013, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[18]  H Haned,et al.  Exploratory data analysis for the interpretation of low template DNA mixtures. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[19]  F Taroni,et al.  Inference about the number of contributors to a DNA mixture: Comparative analyses of a Bayesian network approach and the maximum allele count method. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[20]  P Gill,et al.  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. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[21]  Mark W. Perlin,et al.  Combining DNA evidence for greater match information , 2011 .

[22]  Peter Gill,et al.  Analysis of complex DNA mixtures using the Forensim package , 2011 .

[23]  S. Lauritzen,et al.  Probabilistic expert systems for handling artifacts in complex DNA mixtures. , 2011, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[24]  T. Tvedebrink,et al.  Evaluating the weight of evidence by using quantitative short tandem repeat data in DNA mixtures , 2010 .

[25]  Wing Kam Fung,et al.  Familial database search on two-person mixture , 2010, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[26]  Chiara Bocci,et al.  Probabilistic expert systems for forensic inference from DNA markers in horses: applications to confirm genealogies with lack of genetic data. , 2010, The Journal of heredity.

[27]  John Buckleton,et al.  Interpreting low template DNA profiles. , 2009, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[28]  Niels Morling,et al.  Estimating the probability of allelic drop-out of STR alleles in forensic genetics. , 2009, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[29]  Robert G Cowell,et al.  Validation of an STR peak area model. , 2009, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[30]  J. Mortera,et al.  Sensitivity of inferences in forensic genetics to assumptions about founding genes , 2009, 0908.2862.

[31]  Jonathan Whitaker,et al.  Interpretation of complex DNA profiles using empirical models and a method to measure their robustness. , 2008, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[32]  J Mortera,et al.  Object-oriented Bayesian networks for complex forensic DNA profiling problems. , 2007, Forensic science international.

[33]  James Curran,et al.  LoComatioN: a software tool for the analysis of low copy number DNA profiles. , 2007, Forensic science international.

[34]  S L Lauritzen,et al.  Identification and separation of DNA mixtures using peak area information. , 2007, Forensic science international.

[35]  P. Gill,et al.  PENDULUM--a guideline-based approach to the interpretation of STR mixtures. , 2005, Forensic science international.

[36]  J M Curran,et al.  Interpretation of repeat measurement DNA evidence allowing for multiple contributors and population substructure. , 2005, Forensic science international.

[37]  James Curran,et al.  A graphical simulation model of the entire DNA process associated with the analysis of short tandem repeat loci , 2005, Nucleic acids research.

[38]  Franco Taroni,et al.  Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists , 2004 .

[39]  A. Dawid,et al.  Probabilistic expert systems for DNA mixture profiling. , 2003, Theoretical population biology.

[40]  Julia Mortera,et al.  Bounding the number of contributors to mixed DNA stains. , 2002, Forensic science international.

[41]  Dw Van Boxel,et al.  Probabilistic Expert Systems for Forensic Inference from Genetic Markers , 2002 .

[42]  M W Perlin,et al.  Linear mixture analysis: a mathematical approach to resolving mixed DNA samples. , 2001, Journal of forensic sciences.

[43]  John M. Butler,et al.  Forensic DNA Typing: Biology, Technology, and Genetics of STR Markers , 2001 .

[44]  J Buckleton,et al.  An investigation of the rigor of interpretation rules for STRs derived from less than 100 pg of DNA. , 2000, Forensic science international.

[45]  David J. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Local computations with probabilities on graphical structures and their application to expert systems , 1990 .

[46]  A. Jeffreys,et al.  Individual-specific ‘fingerprints’ of human DNA , 1985, Nature.

[47]  Allan H. Seheult,et al.  On a problem in forensic science , 1978 .

[48]  S WRIGHT,et al.  Genetical Structure of Populations , 1950, British medical journal.

[49]  L. Stein,et al.  Probability and the Weighing of Evidence , 1950 .

[50]  H. Hwa,et al.  A 1204-single nucleotide polymorphism and insertion-deletion polymorphism panel for massively parallel sequencing analysis of DNA mixtures. , 2018, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[51]  K Slooten,et al.  Identifying common donors in DNA mixtures, with applications to database searches. , 2017, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[52]  Niels Morling,et al.  Statistical model for degraded DNA samples and adjusted probabilities for allelic drop-out. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[53]  D. Balding,et al.  A method for quantifying differentiation between populations at multi-allelic loci and its implications for investigating identity and paternity , 2005, Genetica.

[54]  Julia Mortera,et al.  Analysis of DNA mixtures using Bayesian networks , 2003 .

[55]  J A Lambert,et al.  Taking account of peak areas when interpreting mixed DNA profiles. , 1998, Journal of forensic sciences.

[56]  Fengzhu Sun,et al.  The Polymerase Chain Reaction and Branching Processes , 1995, J. Comput. Biol..