Version 2 2021-06-30, 00:46Version 2 2021-06-30, 00:46
Version 1 2021-06-30, 00:44Version 1 2021-06-30, 00:44
journal contribution
posted on 2021-06-30, 00:46authored byLaura Russell, Stuart Cooper, Richard Wivell, Zane Kerr, Duncan Taylor, John S. Buckleton, Jo-Anne Bright
<p>Until recently, forensic DNA profile
interpretation was predominantly a manual, time consuming process undertaken by
analysts using heuristics to determine those genotype combinations that could
reasonably explain a recovered profile. Probabilistic genotyping (PG) has now
become commonplace in the interpretation of DNA profiling evidence. As the
complexity of PG necessitates the use of algorithms and modern computing power
it has been dubbed by some critics as a ‘black box’ approach. Here we discuss
the wealth of information that is provided within the output of STRmix™, one
example of a continuous PG system. We
discuss how this information can be evaluated by analysts either to give
confidence in the results or to indicate that further interpretation may be
warranted. Specifically, we discuss the ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ diagnostics
output by STRmix™ and give some context to the values that may be observed.</p>
Funding
US National Institute of Justice: Grant No. 2017-DN-BX-K541