Comparing Genetic and Physical Anthropological Analyses for the Biological Profile of Unidentified and Identified Bodies in Milan

When studying unknown human remains, the estimation of skeletal sex and ancestry is paramount to create the victim’s biological profile and attempt identification. In this paper, a multidisciplinary approach to infer the sex and biogeographical ancestry of different skeletons, using physical methods and routine forensic markers, is explored. Forensic investigators, thus, encounter two main issues: (1) the use of markers such as STRs that are not the best choice in terms of inferring biogeographical ancestry but are routine forensic markers to identify a person, and (2) the concordance of the physical and molecular results. In addition, a comparison of physical/molecular and then antemortem data (of a subset of individuals that are identified during our research) was evaluated. Antemortem data was particularly beneficial to evaluate the accuracy rates of the biological profiles produced by anthropologists and classification rates obtained by molecular experts using autosomal genetic profiles and multivariate statistical approaches. Our results highlight that physical and molecular analyses are in perfect agreement for sex estimation, but some discrepancies in ancestry estimation were observed in 5 out of 24 cases.

[1]  F. Kronenberg,et al.  Haplogrep 3 - an interactive haplogroup classification and analysis platform , 2023, Nucleic Acids Res..

[2]  R. Jantz,et al.  How Physical and Molecular Anthropology Interplay in the Creation of Biological Profiles of Unidentified Migrants , 2023, Genes.

[3]  E. Alladio,et al.  Biogeographical ancestry, variable selection, and PLS-DA method: a new panel to assess ancestry in forensic samples via MPS technology. , 2022, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[4]  C. Sforza,et al.  Sexual Dimorphism of Cranial Morphological Traits in an Italian Sample: A Population-Specific Logistic Regression Model for Predicting Sex , 2022, Biology.

[5]  E. Alladio,et al.  Multivariate statistical approach and machine learning for the evaluation of biogeographical ancestry inference in the forensic field , 2022, Scientific Reports.

[6]  Yue Cao,et al.  Could routine forensic STR genotyping data leak personal phenotypic information? , 2022, Forensic science international.

[7]  D. De Angelis,et al.  Twenty-five years of unidentified bodies: an account from Milano, Italy , 2021, International Journal of Legal Medicine.

[8]  P. Twumasi,et al.  Forensic identification of missing persons using DNA from surviving relatives and femur bone retrieved from salty environment , 2020 .

[9]  Giri Narasimhan,et al.  So you think you can PLS-DA? , 2017, BMC Bioinformatics.

[10]  O. Semino,et al.  A multivariate statistical approach for the estimation of the ethnic origin of unknown genetic profiles in forensic genetics. , 2019, Forensic Science International: Genetics.

[11]  Connie L. Parks,et al.  Accuracy Rates of Ancestry Estimation by Forensic Anthropologists Using Identified Forensic Cases , 2017, Journal of forensic sciences.

[12]  Olivia Cheronet,et al.  A minimally-invasive method for sampling human petrous bones from the cranial base for ancient DNA analysis. , 2017, BioTechniques.

[13]  Marcella Attimonelli,et al.  HmtDB 2016: data update, a better performing query system and human mitochondrial DNA haplogroup predictor , 2016, Nucleic Acids Res..

[14]  M. Timmerman,et al.  Approaches to Sample Size Determination for Multivariate Data: Applications to PCA and PLS-DA of Omics Data. , 2016, Journal of proteome research.

[15]  Connie L. Parks,et al.  Accuracy Rates of Sex Estimation by Forensic Anthropologists through Comparison with DNA Typing Results in Forensic Casework , 2016, Journal of forensic sciences.

[16]  J. Krause,et al.  EAGER: efficient ancient genome reconstruction , 2016, Genome Biology.

[17]  A. Enache,et al.  Molecular DNA Analysis in Forensic Identification. , 2016, Clinical laboratory.

[18]  G. Renaud,et al.  Schmutzi: estimation of contamination and endogenous mitochondrial consensus calling for ancient DNA , 2015, Genome Biology.

[19]  Chris Phillips,et al.  Forensic genetic analysis of bio-geographical ancestry. , 2015, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[20]  W. E. Frank,et al.  A global analysis of Y-chromosomal haplotype diversity for 23 STR loci , 2014, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[21]  R. Brereton,et al.  Partial least squares discriminant analysis: taking the magic away , 2014 .

[22]  Cristina E. Valdiosera,et al.  Complete mitochondrial genome sequence of a Middle Pleistocene cave bear reconstructed from ultrashort DNA fragments , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  David L Duewer,et al.  U.S. population data for 29 autosomal STR loci. , 2013, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[24]  Philip L. F. Johnson,et al.  mapDamage2.0: fast approximate Bayesian estimates of ancient DNA damage parameters , 2013, Bioinform..

[25]  Hans-Peter Kriegel,et al.  A survey on unsupervised outlier detection in high‐dimensional numerical data , 2012, Stat. Anal. Data Min..

[26]  M Katherine Spradley,et al.  Sex Estimation in Forensic Anthropology: Skull Versus Postcranial Elements , 2011, Journal of forensic sciences.

[27]  S. Pääbo,et al.  Multiplexed DNA Sequence Capture of Mitochondrial Genomes Using PCR Products , 2010, PloS one.

[28]  Matthias Meyer,et al.  Illumina sequencing library preparation for highly multiplexed target capture and sequencing. , 2010, Cold Spring Harbor protocols.

[29]  J. Hefner,et al.  Cranial Nonmetric Variation and Estimating Ancestry * , 2009, Journal of forensic sciences.

[30]  Richard Durbin,et al.  Sequence analysis Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows – Wheeler transform , 2009 .

[31]  R. Jantz,et al.  Understanding race and human variation: why forensic anthropologists are good at identifying race. , 2009, American journal of physical anthropology.

[32]  P. Filzmoser,et al.  Repeated double cross validation , 2009 .

[33]  Phillip L Walker,et al.  Sexing skulls using discriminant function analysis of visually assessed traits. , 2008, American journal of physical anthropology.

[34]  J. Butler,et al.  Short tandem repeat typing technologies used in human identity testing. , 2007, BioTechniques.

[35]  Tom Scholl,et al.  Bioinformatics and Human Identification in Mass Fatality Incidents: The World Trade Center Disaster * , 2007, Journal of forensic sciences.

[36]  G. Callis,et al.  Decalcification of Bone: Literature Review and Practical Study of Various Decalcifying Agents. Methods, and Their Effects on Bone Histology , 1998 .

[37]  J. Aronson,et al.  DECALCIFIED BONE : TWENTY YEARS OF SUCCESSFUL SPECIMEN MANAGEMENT , 1997 .

[38]  T Solheim,et al.  Age estimation of adults from dental radiographs. , 1995, Forensic science international.

[39]  D. Ubelaker,et al.  Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains , 1994 .

[40]  H Lamendin,et al.  A simple technique for age estimation in adult corpses: the two criteria dental method. , 1992, Journal of forensic sciences.

[41]  S. Brooks,et al.  Skeletal age determination based on the os pubis: A comparison of the Acsádi-Nemeskéri and Suchey-Brooks methods , 1990 .

[42]  S. Wold,et al.  Partial least squares analysis with cross‐validation for the two‐class problem: A Monte Carlo study , 1987 .

[43]  M. Işcan,et al.  Determination of age from the sternal rib in white males: a test of the phase method. , 1986, Journal of forensic sciences.

[44]  M. Işcan,et al.  Determination of age from the sternal rib in white females: a test of the phase method. , 1986, Journal of forensic sciences.

[45]  C. Lovejoy,et al.  Multifactorial determination of skeletal age at death: a method and blind tests of its accuracy. , 1985, American journal of physical anthropology.

[46]  T W Phenice,et al.  A newly developed visual method of sexing the os pubis. , 1969, American journal of physical anthropology.