STRmix™ collaborative exercise on DNA mixture interpretation

Jo Anne Bright; Kevin Cheng; Zane Kerr; Catherine McGovern; Hannah Kelly; Tamyra R. Moretti; Michael A. Smith; Frederick R. Bieber; Bruce Budowle; Michael D. Coble; Rashed Alghafri; Paul Stafford Allen; Amy Barber; Vickie Beamer; Christina Buettner; Melanie Russell; Christian Gehrig; Tacha Hicks; Jessica Charak; Kate Cheong-Wing; Anne Ciecko; Christie T. Davis; Michael Donley; Natalie Pedersen; Bill Gartside; Dominic Granger; Mary Margaret Greer-Ritzheimer; Erick Reisinger; Jarrah Kennedy; Erin Grammer; Marla Kaplan; David Hansen; Hans J. Larsen; Alanna Laureano; Christina Li; Eugene Lien; Emilia Lindberg; Ciara Kelly; Ben Mallinder; Simon Malsom; Alyse Yacovone-Margetts; Andrew McWhorter; Sapana M. Prajapati; Tamar Powell; Gary Shutler; Kate Stevenson; April R. Stonehouse; Lindsey Smith; Julie Murakami; Eric Halsing; Darren Wright; Leigh Clark; Duncan A. Taylor; John Buckleton

doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.01.006

STRmix™ collaborative exercise on DNA mixture interpretation

Jo Anne Bright^*, Kevin Cheng, Zane Kerr, Catherine McGovern, Hannah Kelly, Tamyra R. Moretti, Michael A. Smith, Frederick R. Bieber, Bruce Budowle, Michael D. Coble, Rashed Alghafri, Paul Stafford Allen, Amy Barber, Vickie Beamer, Christina Buettner, Melanie Russell, Christian Gehrig, Tacha Hicks, Jessica Charak, Kate Cheong-WingAnne Ciecko, Christie T. Davis, Michael Donley, Natalie Pedersen, Bill Gartside, Dominic Granger, Mary Margaret Greer-Ritzheimer, Erick Reisinger, Jarrah Kennedy, Erin Grammer, Marla Kaplan, David Hansen, Hans J. Larsen, Alanna Laureano, Christina Li, Eugene Lien, Emilia Lindberg, Ciara Kelly, Ben Mallinder, Simon Malsom, Alyse Yacovone-Margetts, Andrew McWhorter, Sapana M. Prajapati, Tamar Powell, Gary Shutler, Kate Stevenson, April R. Stonehouse, Lindsey Smith, Julie Murakami, Eric Halsing, Darren Wright, Leigh Clark, Duncan A. Taylor, John Buckleton

^*Corresponding author for this work

Section of Forensic Genetics

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

An intra and inter-laboratory study using the probabilistic genotyping (PG) software STRmix™ is reported. Two complex mixtures from the PROVEDIt set, analysed on an Applied Biosystems™ 3500 Series Genetic Analyzer, were selected. 174 participants responded. For Sample 1 (low template, in the order of 200 rfu for major contributors) five participants described the comparison as inconclusive with respect to the POI or excluded him. Where LRs were assigned, the point estimates ranging from 2 × 10⁴ to 8 × 10⁶. For Sample 2 (in the order of 2000 rfu for major contributors), LRs ranged from 2 × 10²⁸ to 2 × 10²⁹. Where LRs were calculated, the differences between participants can be attributed to (from largest to smallest impact): • varying number of contributors (NoC), • the exclusion of some loci within the interpretation, • differences in local CE data analysis methods leading to variation in the peaks present and their heights in the input files used, • and run-to-run variation due to the random sampling inherent to all MCMC-based methods. This study demonstrates a high level of repeatability and reproducibility among the participants. For those results that differed from the mode, the differences in LR were almost always minor or conservative.

Original language	English
Journal	Forensic Science International: Genetics
Volume	40
Pages (from-to)	1-8
Number of pages	8
ISSN	1872-4973
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.01.006
Publication status	Published - May 2019

Keywords

Forensic DNA interpretation
Inter-laboratory study
Intra-laboratory study
Probabilistic genotyping
STRmix

Access to Document

10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.01.006

Cite this

Bright, J. A., Cheng, K., Kerr, Z., McGovern, C., Kelly, H., Moretti, T. R., Smith, M. A., Bieber, F. R., Budowle, B., Coble, M. D., Alghafri, R., Allen, P. S., Barber, A., Beamer, V., Buettner, C., Russell, M., Gehrig, C., Hicks, T., Charak, J., ... Buckleton, J. (2019). STRmix™ collaborative exercise on DNA mixture interpretation. Forensic Science International: Genetics, 40, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.01.006

Bright, JA, Cheng, K, Kerr, Z, McGovern, C, Kelly, H, Moretti, TR, Smith, MA, Bieber, FR, Budowle, B, Coble, MD, Alghafri, R, Allen, PS, Barber, A, Beamer, V, Buettner, C, Russell, M, Gehrig, C, Hicks, T, Charak, J, Cheong-Wing, K, Ciecko, A, Davis, CT, Donley, M, Pedersen, N, Gartside, B, Granger, D, Greer-Ritzheimer, MM, Reisinger, E, Kennedy, J, Grammer, E, Kaplan, M, Hansen, D, Larsen, HJ, Laureano, A, Li, C, Lien, E, Lindberg, E, Kelly, C, Mallinder, B, Malsom, S, Yacovone-Margetts, A, McWhorter, A, Prajapati, SM, Powell, T, Shutler, G, Stevenson, K, Stonehouse, AR, Smith, L, Murakami, J, Halsing, E, Wright, D, Clark, L, Taylor, DA & Buckleton, J 2019, 'STRmix™ collaborative exercise on DNA mixture interpretation', Forensic Science International: Genetics, vol. 40, pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.01.006

@article{dbeaf7bc53d0478da61df032a8513d37,

title = "STRmix{\texttrademark} collaborative exercise on DNA mixture interpretation",

abstract = "An intra and inter-laboratory study using the probabilistic genotyping (PG) software STRmix{\texttrademark} is reported. Two complex mixtures from the PROVEDIt set, analysed on an Applied Biosystems{\texttrademark} 3500 Series Genetic Analyzer, were selected. 174 participants responded. For Sample 1 (low template, in the order of 200 rfu for major contributors) five participants described the comparison as inconclusive with respect to the POI or excluded him. Where LRs were assigned, the point estimates ranging from 2 × 104 to 8 × 106. For Sample 2 (in the order of 2000 rfu for major contributors), LRs ranged from 2 × 1028 to 2 × 1029. Where LRs were calculated, the differences between participants can be attributed to (from largest to smallest impact): • varying number of contributors (NoC), • the exclusion of some loci within the interpretation, • differences in local CE data analysis methods leading to variation in the peaks present and their heights in the input files used, • and run-to-run variation due to the random sampling inherent to all MCMC-based methods. This study demonstrates a high level of repeatability and reproducibility among the participants. For those results that differed from the mode, the differences in LR were almost always minor or conservative.",

keywords = "Forensic DNA interpretation, Inter-laboratory study, Intra-laboratory study, Probabilistic genotyping, STRmix",

author = "Bright, {Jo Anne} and Kevin Cheng and Zane Kerr and Catherine McGovern and Hannah Kelly and Moretti, {Tamyra R.} and Smith, {Michael A.} and Bieber, {Frederick R.} and Bruce Budowle and Coble, {Michael D.} and Rashed Alghafri and Allen, {Paul Stafford} and Amy Barber and Vickie Beamer and Christina Buettner and Melanie Russell and Christian Gehrig and Tacha Hicks and Jessica Charak and Kate Cheong-Wing and Anne Ciecko and Davis, {Christie T.} and Michael Donley and Natalie Pedersen and Bill Gartside and Dominic Granger and Greer-Ritzheimer, {Mary Margaret} and Erick Reisinger and Jarrah Kennedy and Erin Grammer and Marla Kaplan and David Hansen and Larsen, {Hans J.} and Alanna Laureano and Christina Li and Eugene Lien and Emilia Lindberg and Ciara Kelly and Ben Mallinder and Simon Malsom and Alyse Yacovone-Margetts and Andrew McWhorter and Prajapati, {Sapana M.} and Tamar Powell and Gary Shutler and Kate Stevenson and Stonehouse, {April R.} and Lindsey Smith and Julie Murakami and Eric Halsing and Darren Wright and Leigh Clark and Taylor, {Duncan A.} and John Buckleton",

year = "2019",

month = may,

doi = "10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.01.006",

language = "English",

volume = "40",

pages = "1--8",

journal = "Forensic Science International: Genetics",

issn = "1872-4973",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - STRmix™ collaborative exercise on DNA mixture interpretation

AU - Bright, Jo Anne

AU - Cheng, Kevin

AU - Kerr, Zane

AU - McGovern, Catherine

AU - Kelly, Hannah

AU - Moretti, Tamyra R.

AU - Smith, Michael A.

AU - Bieber, Frederick R.

AU - Budowle, Bruce

AU - Coble, Michael D.

AU - Alghafri, Rashed

AU - Allen, Paul Stafford

AU - Barber, Amy

AU - Beamer, Vickie

AU - Buettner, Christina

AU - Russell, Melanie

AU - Gehrig, Christian

AU - Hicks, Tacha

AU - Charak, Jessica

AU - Cheong-Wing, Kate

AU - Ciecko, Anne

AU - Davis, Christie T.

AU - Donley, Michael

AU - Pedersen, Natalie

AU - Gartside, Bill

AU - Granger, Dominic

AU - Greer-Ritzheimer, Mary Margaret

AU - Reisinger, Erick

AU - Kennedy, Jarrah

AU - Grammer, Erin

AU - Kaplan, Marla

AU - Hansen, David

AU - Larsen, Hans J.

AU - Laureano, Alanna

AU - Li, Christina

AU - Lien, Eugene

AU - Lindberg, Emilia

AU - Kelly, Ciara

AU - Mallinder, Ben

AU - Malsom, Simon

AU - Yacovone-Margetts, Alyse

AU - McWhorter, Andrew

AU - Prajapati, Sapana M.

AU - Powell, Tamar

AU - Shutler, Gary

AU - Stevenson, Kate

AU - Stonehouse, April R.

AU - Smith, Lindsey

AU - Murakami, Julie

AU - Halsing, Eric

AU - Wright, Darren

AU - Clark, Leigh

AU - Taylor, Duncan A.

AU - Buckleton, John

PY - 2019/5

Y1 - 2019/5

N2 - An intra and inter-laboratory study using the probabilistic genotyping (PG) software STRmix™ is reported. Two complex mixtures from the PROVEDIt set, analysed on an Applied Biosystems™ 3500 Series Genetic Analyzer, were selected. 174 participants responded. For Sample 1 (low template, in the order of 200 rfu for major contributors) five participants described the comparison as inconclusive with respect to the POI or excluded him. Where LRs were assigned, the point estimates ranging from 2 × 104 to 8 × 106. For Sample 2 (in the order of 2000 rfu for major contributors), LRs ranged from 2 × 1028 to 2 × 1029. Where LRs were calculated, the differences between participants can be attributed to (from largest to smallest impact): • varying number of contributors (NoC), • the exclusion of some loci within the interpretation, • differences in local CE data analysis methods leading to variation in the peaks present and their heights in the input files used, • and run-to-run variation due to the random sampling inherent to all MCMC-based methods. This study demonstrates a high level of repeatability and reproducibility among the participants. For those results that differed from the mode, the differences in LR were almost always minor or conservative.

AB - An intra and inter-laboratory study using the probabilistic genotyping (PG) software STRmix™ is reported. Two complex mixtures from the PROVEDIt set, analysed on an Applied Biosystems™ 3500 Series Genetic Analyzer, were selected. 174 participants responded. For Sample 1 (low template, in the order of 200 rfu for major contributors) five participants described the comparison as inconclusive with respect to the POI or excluded him. Where LRs were assigned, the point estimates ranging from 2 × 104 to 8 × 106. For Sample 2 (in the order of 2000 rfu for major contributors), LRs ranged from 2 × 1028 to 2 × 1029. Where LRs were calculated, the differences between participants can be attributed to (from largest to smallest impact): • varying number of contributors (NoC), • the exclusion of some loci within the interpretation, • differences in local CE data analysis methods leading to variation in the peaks present and their heights in the input files used, • and run-to-run variation due to the random sampling inherent to all MCMC-based methods. This study demonstrates a high level of repeatability and reproducibility among the participants. For those results that differed from the mode, the differences in LR were almost always minor or conservative.

KW - Forensic DNA interpretation

KW - Inter-laboratory study

KW - Intra-laboratory study

KW - Probabilistic genotyping

KW - STRmix

U2 - 10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.01.006

DO - 10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.01.006

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 30665115

AN - SCOPUS:85060079691

SN - 1872-4973

VL - 40

SP - 1

EP - 8

JO - Forensic Science International: Genetics

JF - Forensic Science International: Genetics

ER -

STRmix™ collaborative exercise on DNA mixture interpretation

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this