Current developments in forensic interpretation of mixed DNA samples (Review)

A number of recent improvements have provided contemporary forensic investigations with a variety of tools to improve the analysis of mixed DNA samples in criminal investigations, producing notable improvements in the analysis of complex trace samples in cases of sexual assult and homicide. Mixed DNA contains DNA from two or more contributors, compounding DNA analysis by combining DNA from one or more major contributors with small amounts of DNA from potentially numerous minor contributors. These samples are characterized by a high probability of drop-out or drop-in combined with elevated stutter, significantly increasing analysis complexity. At some loci, minor contributor alleles may be completely obscured due to amplification bias or over-amplification, creating the illusion of additional contributors. Thus, estimating the number of contributors and separating contributor genotypes at a given locus is significantly more difficult in mixed DNA samples, requiring the application of specialized protocols that have only recently been widely commercialized and standardized. Over the last decade, the accuracy and repeatability of mixed DNA analyses available to conventional forensic laboratories has greatly advanced in terms of laboratory technology, mathematical models and biostatistical software, generating more accurate, rapid and readily available data for legal proceedings and criminal cases.

[1]  L. Roewer,et al.  Individual specific extraction of DNA from male mixtures--First evaluation studies. , 2011, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[2]  Benjamin E. Krenke,et al.  Developmental validation of a real-time PCR assay for the simultaneous quantification of total human and male DNA. , 2008, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[3]  William R. Hudlow,et al.  Development of a rapid, 96-well alkaline based differential DNA extraction method for sexual assault evidence. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[4]  J Buckleton,et al.  Interpreting simple STR mixtures using allele peak areas. , 1998, Forensic science international.

[5]  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.

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

[7]  David Lazer,et al.  Human genetics. Finding criminals through DNA of their relatives. , 2006, Science.

[8]  Peter Gill,et al.  National recommendations of the Technical UK DNA working group on mixture interpretation for the NDNAD and for court going purposes. , 2008, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[9]  J. Whitaker,et al.  Analysis and interpretation of mixed forensic stains using DNA STR profiling. , 1998, Forensic science international.

[10]  A. Darvasi,et al.  Forensic identification of an individual in complex DNA mixtures. , 2011, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[11]  Prevalence and persistence of male DNA identified in mixed saliva samples after intense kissing. , 2013, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[12]  I. Evett,et al.  Interpreting DNA Evidence: Statistical Genetics for Forensic Scientists , 1998 .

[13]  Peter Gill,et al.  Role of short tandem repeat DNA in forensic casework in the UK--past, present, and future perspectives. , 2002, BioTechniques.

[14]  Amanda B. Hepler,et al.  Object-oriented Bayesian networks for paternity cases with allelic dependencies. , 2008, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[15]  K. Elliott,et al.  Identification and isolation of male cells using fluorescence in situ hybridisation and laser microdissection, for use in the investigation of sexual assault. , 2007, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[16]  Colin Aitken,et al.  Bayesian Networks for Evaluating Scientific Evidence , 2006 .

[17]  K Slooten,et al.  Validation of DNA-based identification software by computation of pedigree likelihood ratios. , 2011, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[18]  Swee Lay Thein,et al.  Hypervariable ‘minisatellite’ regions in human DNA , 1985, Nature.

[19]  D. Roberge,et al.  Searching a DNA databank with complex mixtures from two individuals , 2009 .

[20]  L. Dixon,et al.  The prevalence of mixed DNA profiles in fingernail samples taken from individuals in the general population. , 2007, Forensic science international. Genetics.

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

[22]  Ronny Decorte,et al.  Automating a combined composite-consensus method to generate DNA profiles from low and high template mixture samples. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

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

[24]  B. McCord,et al.  An analysis of single and multi-copy methods for DNA quantitation by real-time polymerase chain reaction. , 2011, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[25]  Hinda Haned,et al.  Forensim: an open-source initiative for the evaluation of statistical methods in forensic genetics. , 2011, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[26]  Peter Gill,et al.  Development of a simulation model to assess the impact of contamination in casework using STRs. , 2004, Journal of forensic sciences.

[27]  W. Fung,et al.  Identifying contributors of two-person DNA mixtures by familial database search , 2012, Zeitschrift für Rechtsmedizin.

[28]  Simon Malsom,et al.  The prevalence of mixed DNA profiles in fingernail samples taken from couples who co-habit using autosomal and Y-STRs. , 2009, Forensic science international. Genetics.

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

[30]  V. Pascali,et al.  Joint Bayesian analysis of forensic mixtures. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[31]  M. Perlin,et al.  Validating TrueAllele® DNA Mixture Interpretation * ,† , 2011, Journal of forensic sciences.

[32]  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.

[33]  Niels Morling,et al.  Interpretation of DNA mixtures--European consensus on principles. , 2007, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[34]  Peter Gill,et al.  Towards understanding the effect of uncertainty in the number of contributors to DNA stains. , 2007, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[35]  J. Butler,et al.  Genetics and Genomics of Core Short Tandem Repeat Loci Used in Human Identity Testing , 2006, Journal of forensic sciences.

[36]  T. Egeland,et al.  Complex mixtures: a critical examination of a paper by Homer et al. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[37]  Tereza Neocleous,et al.  The prevalence of mixed DNA profiles on fingernail swabs. , 2010, Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society.

[38]  James M Curran,et al.  Effectiveness of familial searches. , 2008, Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society.

[39]  Rana Saad,et al.  Discovery, Development, and Current Applications of Dna Identity Testing , 2005, Proceedings.

[40]  R. J. Mitchell,et al.  Forensic trace DNA: a review , 2010, Investigative Genetics.

[41]  H Haned,et al.  The predictive value of the maximum likelihood estimator of the number of contributors to a DNA mixture. , 2011, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[42]  Simon Cowen,et al.  A likelihood ratio approach to familial searching of large DNA databases , 2008 .

[43]  B. Weir,et al.  Interpreting DNA mixtures. , 1997, Journal of forensic sciences.

[44]  Wing K. Fung,et al.  The evidentiary values of "cold hits" in a DNA database search on two-person mixture. , 2011, Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society.

[45]  Hinda Haned,et al.  Estimating the Number of Contributors to Forensic DNA Mixtures: Does Maximum Likelihood Perform Better Than Maximum Allele Count? , 2011, Journal of forensic sciences.

[46]  F Taroni,et al.  Bayesian networks for evaluating forensic DNA profiling evidence: a review and guide to literature. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[47]  Carissa M Krane,et al.  Empirical analysis of the STR profiles resulting from conceptual mixtures. , 2005, Journal of forensic sciences.

[48]  W R Mayr,et al.  DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: Recommendations on the interpretation of mixtures. , 2006, Forensic science international.

[49]  P. Vacek,et al.  Aneuploidy detection in mixed DNA samples by methylation-sensitive amplification and microarray analysis. , 2010, Clinical chemistry.

[50]  SallyAnn Harbison,et al.  Interpretation of DNA mixtures--Australian and New Zealand consensus on principles. , 2009, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[51]  J E McEwen.  Forensic DNA data banking by state crime laboratories. , 1995, American journal of human genetics.

[52]  C. McAlister,et al.  The use of fluorescence in situ hybridisation and laser microdissection to identify and isolate male cells in an azoospermic sexual assault case. , 2011, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[53]  B Budowle,et al.  Validation of short tandem repeats (STRs) for forensic usage: performance testing of fluorescent multiplex STR systems and analysis of authentic and simulated forensic samples. , 2001, Journal of forensic sciences.

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

[55]  J. Bright,et al.  Development of a one-tube extraction and amplification method for DNA analysis of sperm and epithelial cells recovered from forensic samples by laser microdissection. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[56]  R. G. Cowell.  Object-oriented Bayesian networks for DNA mixture analyses , 2006 .