Sanger sequencing of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) control region was previously the only method available for forensic casework involving degraded samples from skeletal remains. The introduction of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) has transformed genetic data generation and human identification using mtDNA. Whole mitochondrial genome (mtGenome) analysis is now being introduced into forensic laboratories around the world to analyze historical remains. Research into large pedigrees using the mtGenome is critical to evaluate currently available interpretation guidelines for mtDNA analysis, which were developed for comparisons using the control region. This study included mtGenomes from 225 individuals from the last four generations of the Norfolk Island (NI) genetic isolate pedigree consisting of 49 distinct maternal lineages. The data from these individuals were arranged into 2339 maternally related pairs separated by up to 18 meioses. Our results show that 97.3% of maternally related pairs were concordant at all nucleotide positions, resulting in the correct interpretation of \"Cannot Exclude\"; 2.7% of pairs produced an \"Inconclusive\" result, and there were no instances of false exclusion. While these results indicate that existing guidelines are suitable for multigenerational whole mtGenome analysis, we recommend caution be taken when classifying heteroplasmic changes as differences for human identification. Our data showed the classification of heteroplasmic changes as differences increases the prevalence of inconclusive identification by 6%, with false exclusions observed in 0.34% of pairs examined. Further studies of multigenerational pedigrees, however, are needed to validate mtGenome interpretation guidelines for historical case work to more fully utilize emerging advancements.

The value of the evidence depends critically on propositions. In the second of two papers intended to provide advice to the community on difficult aspects of evaluation and the formulation of propositions, we focus primarily on activity level propositions. This helps the court address the question of \"How did an individual\'s cell material get there?\". In order to do this, we expand the framework outlined in the first companion paper. First, it is important not to conflate results and propositions. Statements given activity level propositions aim to help address issues of indirect vs direct transfer, and the time of the activity, but it is important to avoid use of the word \'transfer\' in propositions. This is because propositions are assessed by the Court, but DNA transfer is a factor that scientists need to take into account for the interpretation of their results. Suitable activity level propositions are ideally set before knowledge of the results and address issues like: X stabbed Y vs. an unknown person stabbed Y but X met Y the day before. The scientist assigns the probability of the evidence, if each of the alternate propositions is true, to derive a likelihood ratio. To do this, the scientist asks: a) \"what are the expectations if each of the propositions is true?\" b) \"What data are available to assist in the evaluation of the results given the propositions?\" When presenting evidence, scientists work within the hierarchy of propositions framework. The value of evidence calculated for a DNA profile cannot be carried over to higher levels in the hierarchy - the calculations given sub-source, source and activity level propositions are all separate. A number of examples are provided to illustrate the principles espoused, and the criteria that such assessments should meet. Ideally in order to assign probabilities, the analyst should have/collect data that are relevant to the case in question. These data must be relevant to the case at hand and we encourage further research and collection of data to form knowledge bases. Bayesian Networks are extremely useful to help us think about a problem, because they force us to consider all relevant possibilities in a logical way. An example is provided.

暂无摘要。

The beginnings of forensic genetics, one of the most rapidly growing fields of research, can be traced to Great Britain in 1985. It appeared in Poland in 1989. It uses the most advanced technologies, including the investigation of the variability of the human genome through mass parallel sequencing, which help, among other things, to analyze features of human appearance and origin. These technologies coexist with well standardized techniques of multiplex short tandem repeat analysis based on capillary electrophoresis, which allows to obtain a unique individual profile at a minimal cost. Legislation, research standards and guidelines developed by opinion-forming institutions and expert teams play a key role in the field of genetic forensic examinations. This study presents the current normative state of this area. It precedes the presentation of guidelines concerning the main aspects of research in the field of forensic genetics in Poland, prepared by a team of experts gathered within the Polish Speaking Working Group of the International Forensic Genetics Society and the Forensic Genetics Committee of the Polish Society of Forensic Medicine and Criminology.
Genetyka sądowa, której początki w Wielkiej Brytanii datuje się na 1985 r., a w Polsce na 1989 r., to jedna z najszybciej rozwijających się dziedzin badań. Wykorzystuje się w niej najnowocześniejsze, wysokoprzepustowe technologie, w tym badanie zmienności genomu ludzkiego za pomocą masowego równoległego sekwencjonowania, które pozwalają m.in. na analizę cech wyglądu i pochodzenia człowieka. Technologie te współistnieją z wystandaryzowanymi technikami multipleksowej analizy krótkich tandemowych powtórzeń za pomocą rozdziału kapilarnego, które pozwalają uzyskać unikalny profil osobniczy i zminimalizować koszty. Kluczową rolę w genetycznych badaniach sądowych odgrywają akty prawne, a także standardy badawcze i wytyczne tworzone przez opiniotwórcze instytucje i zespoły eksperckie. Niniejsze opracowanie przedstawia aktualnie obowiązujące normy w tym zakresie. Poprzedza ono prezentację wytycznych dotyczących głównych aspektów badań w dziedzinie genetyki sądowej w Polsce, opracowywanych przez zespół ekspertów Polskojęzycznej Grupy Roboczej Międzynarodowego Towarzystwa Genetyki Sądowej oraz Komisji Genetyki Sądowej Polskiego Towarzystwa Medycyny Sądowej i Kryminologii.

The interpretation of evidence continues to be one of the biggest challenges facing the forensic community. This is the first of two papers intended to provide advice on difficult aspects of evaluation and in particular on the formulation of propositions. The scientist has a dual role: investigator (crime-focused), where often there is no suspect available and a database search may be required; evaluator (suspect-focused), where the strength of evidence is assessed in the context of the case. In investigative mode, generally the aim is to produce leads regarding the source of the DNA. Sub-source level propositions will be adequate to help identify potential suspects who can be further investigated by the authorities. Once in evaluative mode, given the defence version of events of the person of interest, it may become necessary to consider alternatives that go beyond the source of the DNA (i.e., to consider activity level propositions). In the evaluation phase, it is crucial that formulation of propositions allows the assessment of all the results that will help with the issue at hand. Propositions should therefore be precise (indication of the number of contributors, information on the relevant population etc.), be about causes, not effects (e.g. a \'matching\' DNA profile) and to avoid bias, must not be findings-led. This means that ideally, propositions should be decided based on the case information and before the results of the comparisons are known. This paper primarily reflects upon what has been coined as \"sub-source level propositions\". These are restricted to the evaluation of the DNA profiles themselves, and help answer the issue regarding the source of the DNA. It is to be emphasised that likelihood ratios given sub-source level propositions cannot be carried over to a different level - for example, activity level propositions, where the DNA evidence is put into the context of the alleged activities. This would be highly misleading and could give rise to miscarriages of justice; this will be discussed in a second paper. The value of forensic results depends not only on propositions, but also on the type of results (e.g. allelic designations, peak heights, replicates) and upon the model used: it is therefore important to discuss these aspects. Finally, since communication is key to help understanding by courts, we will explore how to convey the value of the results and explain the importance of avoiding the practice of transposing the conditional.

This investigation intends to study materials and techniques used for biological evidence collection in sexual assault cases and is divided into two stages: in stage one, methods for biological evidence collection (the single swab (including three variants) and the \"double swab technique\") were compared; in stage two, swabs\' component material was compared. The sampling was composed of 42 heterosexual couples who provided mock samples. The collection methods in which the whole swab is covered by evidence presented significantly better outcomes (p < 0.001), such as the \"double swab technique.\" Additionally, nylon swabs proved to present significantly better features regarding the capacity of sample elution, providing significantly higher amounts of DNA (p ≤ 0.034). This study provides guidelines for better collection of biological evidence regarding the collection method using a swab and the proper swab material to utilize.

Forensic genetic laboratories perform an increasing amount of genetic analyses of the X chromosome, in particular to solve complex cases of kinship analysis. For some biological relationships X-chromosomal markers can be more informative than autosomal markers, and there are a large number of markers, methods and databases that have been described for forensic use. Due to their particular mode of inheritance, and their physical location on a single chromosome, some specific considerations are required when estimating the weight of evidence for X-chromosomal marker DNA data. The DNA Commission of the International Society for Forensic Genetics (ISFG) hereby presents guidelines and recommendations for the use of X-chromosomal markers in kinship analysis with a special focus on the biostatistical evaluation. Linkage and linkage disequilibrium (association of alleles) are of special importance for such evaluations and these concepts and the implications for likelihood calculations are described in more detail. Furthermore it is important to use appropriate computer software that accounts for linkage and linkage disequilibrium among loci, as well as for mutations. Even though some software exist, there is still a need for further improvement of dedicated software.

Y-STR profiling makes up a small but important proportion of forensic DNA casework. Often Y-STR profiles are used when autosomal profiling has failed to yield an informative result. Consequently Y-STR profiles are often from the most challenging samples. In addition to these points, Y-STR loci are linked, meaning that evaluation of haplotype probabilities are either based on overly simplified counting methods or computationally costly genetic models, neither of which extend well to the evaluation of mixed Y-STR data. For all of these reasons Y-STR data analysis has not seen the same advances as autosomal STR data. We present here a probabilistic model for the interpretation of Y-STR data. Due to the fact that probabilistic systems for Y-STR data are still some way from reaching active casework, we also describe how data can be analysed in a continuous way to generate interpretational thresholds and guidelines.

Currently, several different Y-chromosomal phylogenies and haplogroup nomenclatures are presented in scientific literature and at conferences demonstrating the present diversity in Y-chromosomal phylogenetic trees and Y-SNP sets used within forensic and anthropological research. This situation can be ascribed to the exponential growth of the number of Y-SNPs discovered due to mostly next-generation sequencing (NGS) studies. As Y-SNPs and their respective phylogenetic positions are important in forensics, such as for male lineage characterization and paternal bio-geographic ancestry inference, there is a need for forensic geneticists to know how to deal with these newly identified Y-SNPs and phylogenies, especially since these phylogenies are often created with other aims than to carry out forensic genetic research. Therefore, we give here an overview of four categories of currently used Y-chromosomal phylogenies and the associated Y-SNP sets in scientific research in the current NGS era. We compare these categories based on the construction method, their advantages and disadvantages, the disciplines wherein the phylogenetic tree can be used, and their specific relevance for forensic geneticists. Based on this overview, it is clear that an up-to-date reduced tree with a consensus Y-SNP set and a stable nomenclature will be the most appropriate reference resource for forensic research. Initiatives to reach such an international consensus are therefore highly recommended.

The DNA Commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics (ISFG) regularly publishes guidelines and recommendations concerning the application of DNA polymorphisms to the question of human identification. Previous recommendations published in 2000 addressed the analysis and interpretation of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in forensic casework. While the foundations set forth in the earlier recommendations still apply, new approaches to the quality control, alignment and nomenclature of mitochondrial sequences, as well as the establishment of mtDNA reference population databases, have been developed. Here, we describe these developments and discuss their application to both mtDNA casework and mtDNA reference population databasing applications. While the generation of mtDNA for forensic casework has always been guided by specific standards, it is now well-established that data of the same quality are required for the mtDNA reference population data used to assess the statistical weight of the evidence. As a result, we introduce guidelines regarding sequence generation, as well as quality control measures based on the known worldwide mtDNA phylogeny, that can be applied to ensure the highest quality population data possible. For both casework and reference population databasing applications, the alignment and nomenclature of haplotypes is revised here and the phylogenetic alignment proffered as acceptable standard. In addition, the interpretation of heteroplasmy in the forensic context is updated, and the utility of alignment-free database searches for unbiased probability estimates is highlighted. Finally, we discuss statistical issues and define minimal standards for mtDNA database searches.