﻿ Profile ceiling principle | Kickoff

# Profile ceiling principle

12 Apr

﻿Profile ceiling principle
﻿In some countries, such as the UK, the approach has been to use a match probability of 1 in a billion (1000000000). This approach is highly conservative [22]. It does have the advantage that individual profile frequencies do not have to be calculated because the value used is much lower than the most common profile frequency, even if conservative corrections are incorporated [24].

﻿WHICH POPULATION FREQUENCY DATABASE SHOULD BE USED?
﻿Table 8.3 The effect of different correction methods on the profile frequency calculated in Table 8.1. With this profile, applying a minimum allele frequency of 0.0125 would have no impact because the rarest allele frequency is 0.025

﻿Which population frequency database should be used?

In some cases, the ethnic origins of material recovered from the crime scene are known: for example, if a woman has been sexually assaulted she can normally describe the as- sailant as white, black, Asian, etc. In such a case, for example, if the assailant was described as white, then it would be logical to use a white Caucasian allele frequency database to calculate the profile frequency. In other contexts, there may be no informa- tion about who could have left the material at the crime scene. In countries or regions having substantial populations with different ethnic backgrounds, a common practice is for the profile frequency to be calculated using an allele database for each major population group, and to use the most conservative profile frequency. If we take the ex- ample from Table 8.1, the allele frequency data used is from a white Caucasian database (USA); if we recalculate with allele frequency data representing an African American population we get a profile frequency of 3.36 × 10−16, which is over 200-times less frequent than when we use the Caucasian frequency data. In this case it is clear that the Caucasian data provides a frequency estimate that is more conservative.

﻿Conclusions
The methods that are employed for the correction of profile frequencies vary widely between different judicial systems and even different laboratories within the same judi- cial system. The allele ceiling principle, Balding correction, 95% confidence interval to correct for sampling error, accounting for population sub-division using theta, and the profile ceiling principle have all been used in forensic casework to calculate profile frequencies. For the profile that we have been using as an example in this chapter, the effect of the different correction methods can be seen in Table 8.3. It should be noted that the impact of the different correction methods will vary depending on the individual profile and the size of the allele frequency database. The end result of analysing a profile is to produce a profile frequency, which is an estimate. Incorporating one or more of the correction factors into the profile frequency estimates reduces the chances of overstating the DNA evidence.

﻿
﻿﻿STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF STR PROFILES

﻿Balding, D.J. (2005) Weight-of-evidence for Forensic DNA Profiles. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, pp. 56-81.
Buckleton, J., Triggs, C.M., and Walsh, S.J. (2005) Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation. CRC Press, pp. 341-347.

﻿References
1.Hardy, G. (1908) Mendelian proportions in a mixed population. Science 28, 49-50.

2.Stern, C. (1943) The Hardy-Weinberg law. Science 1997, 137-138.

3.Helgason, A., et al. (2003) A reassessment of genetic diversity in Icelanders: Strong evidence from multiple loci for relative homogeneity caused by genetic drift. Annals of Human Genetics 67,281-297.

4.Destro-Bisol, G., et al. (2000) Microsatellite variation in Central Africa: An analysis of intrapop-ulational and interpopulational genetic diversity. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 112,319-337.

5.Pardo, L.M., et al. (2005) The effect of genetic drift in a young genetically isolated population. Annals of Human Genetics 69, 288-295.

6.Chakraborty,R.(1987)Biochemicalheterozygosityandphenotypicvariabilityofpolygenictraits. Heredity 59, 19-28.

7.Smouse, P.E., et al. (1983) Multiple-locus departures from panmictic equilibrium within and between village gene pools of Amerindian tribes at different stages of agglomeration. Genetics 104,133-153.

8.Sinnock, P. (1975) Wahlund effect for 2-locus model. American Naturalist 109, 565-570.

9.Tishkoff, S.A., et al. (2007) Convergent adaptation of human lactase persistence in Africa and Europe. Nature Genetics 39, 31-40.

10.Wooding, S.P. (2007) Following the herd. Nature Genetics 39, 7-8.

11.Duncan, S.R., et al. (2005) Reappraisal of the historical selective pressures for the CCR5-Delta 32 mutation. Journal of Medical Genetics 42, 205-208.

12.Brinkmann, B., et al. (1998) Mutation rate in human microsatellites: influence of the structure and length of the tandem repeat. American Journal of Human Genetics 62, 1408-1415.

13.Dauber, E.M., et al. (2003) Mutation rates at 23 different short tandem repeat loci. In Progress in Foresnsic Genetics 9, 565-567.

14.Yan, J.W., et al. (2006) Mutations at 17 STR loci in Chinese population. Forensic Science International 162, 53-54.

15.Whittle, M.R., et al. (2004) Updated Brazilian genetic data, together with mutation rates, on 19 STR loci, including D10S1237. Forensic Science International 139, 207-210.

16.Emigh, T.H. (1980) A comparison of tests for Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium. Biometrics 36, 627-642.

17.Guo, S.W., and Thompson, E.A. (1992) Performing the exact test of Hardy-Weinberg Proportion for Multiple Alleles. Biometrics 48, 361-372.

18.Wigginton, J.E., et al. (2005) A note on exact tests of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. American Journal of Human Genetics 76, 887-893.

19.Brinkmann, B. (1998) Overview of PCR-based systems in identity testing. In Forensic DNA Profiling Protocols. Humana Press, pp. 105-120.

20.Balding, D.J. (1995) Estimating products in forensic identification using DNA profiles. Journal of the American Statistical Association 90, 839-844.

21.Balding, D.J., and Nichols, R.A. (1994) DNA profile match probability calculation – how to allow for population stratification, relatedness, database selection and single bands. Forensic Science International 64, 125-140.

22.Foreman, L.A., and Evett, I.W. (2001) Statistical analysis to support forensic interpretation for a new ten-locus STR profiling system. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 147-155

﻿23. National Research Council (1996) The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. National Academy Press.

24. Gill, P., et al. (2003) A comparison of adjustment methods to test the robustness of an STR DNA database comprising of 24 European populations. Forensic Science International 131, 184-196.

25. Curran, J.M., et al. (2003) What is the magnitude of the subpopulation effect? Forensic Science International 135, 1-8.

26. Triggs, C.M., and Buckleton, J.S. (2002) Logical implications of applying the principles of pop- ulation genetics to the interpretation of DNA profiling evidence. Forensic Science International 128,108-114.

27. Buckleton, J.S., et al. (2006) How reliable is the sub-population model in DNA testimony? Forensic Science International 157, 144-148.

28. Foreman, L.A., and Lambert, J.A. (2000) Genetic differentiation within and between four UK ethnic groups. Forensic Science International 114, 7-20.

29. Foreman, L.A., et al. (1998) Regional genetic variation in Caucasians. Forensic Science Interna- tional 95, 27-37.

Random Posts