A method for quantifying differentiation between populations at multi-allelic loci and its implications for investigating identity and paternity Authors
Received: 16 May 1994 Accepted: 26 July 1994 DOI:
Cite this article as: Balding, D.J. & Nichols, R.A. Genetica (1995) 96: 3. doi:10.1007/BF01441146
A method is proposed for allowing for the effects of population differentiation, and other factors, in forensic inference based on DNA profiles. Much current forensic practice ignores, for example, the effects of coancestry and inappropriate databases and is consequently systematically biased against defendants. Problems with the ‘product rule’ for forensic identification have been highlighted by several authors, but important aspects of the problems are not widely appreciated. This arises in part because the match probability has often been confused with the relative frequency of the profile. Further, the analogous problems in paternity cases have received little attention. The proposed method is derived under general assumptions about the underlying population genetic processes. Probabilities relevant to forensic inference are expressed in terms of a single parameter whose values can be chosen to reflect the specific circumstances. The method is currently used in some UK courts and has important advantages over the ‘Ceiling Principle’ method, which has been criticized on a number of grounds.
The authors' work offers a sound approach to accommodating the effects of population structure, based on use of Wright's
. Their equations 1 and 2 are very convenient, and are good approximations to the exact results given by Weir (1994). As they point out, good estimates of ST
are needed. The comments about the ‘generally mixed’ results of independence tests may be met, in part, by the paper of Maiste and Weir in this volume. The authors cite Krane ST
et al. (1992) but had not seen the subsequent rebuttal by Budowle et al. (1994). The work of Wall et al. (1993) contained errors, as noted in Greenhalgh et al. (1994).
An erratum to this article is available at
. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10709-007-9181-2 References
Balding, D.J. & P. Donnelly, 1995. Inference in forensic identification. To appear J. Roy. Statist. Soc. 158.
Balding, D.J. & R.A. Nichols, 1994. DNA profile match probability calculation: how to allow for population stratification, relatedness, database selection and single bands. Forensic Sci. Inter. 64: 125–140.
Cavalli-Sforza, L.L. & A. Piazza, 1993. Human genomic diversity in Europe: a summary of recent research and prospects for the future. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 1: 3–18.
Chakraborty, R. & K.K. Kidd, 1991. The utility of DNA typing in forensic work. Science 254: 1735–1739.
Cockerham, C.C., 1971. Higher order probability functions of identity of alleles by descent. Genetics 69: 235–246.
Crow, J.F. & M. Kimura, 1970. An Introduction to Population Genetics Theory. New York: Harper and Row.
Devlin, B., N. Risch & K. Roeder, 1993. Statistical evaluation of DNA fingerprinting: a critique of the NRC's report. Science 259: 748, 749, 837.
Donnelly, P., 1995. The non-independence of matches at different loci in DNA profiles: quantifying the effect of close relatives on the match probability. (to appear) Heredity.
Ewens, W.J., 1979. Mathematical Population Genetics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Geisser, S. & W. Johnson, 1993. Testing independence of fragment lengths within VNTR loci. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 53: 1103–1106.
Harding, R.M., 1992. VNTRs in review. Evol. Anthrop. 1: 62–71.
Jeffreys, A.J., N.J. Royale, V. Wilson & Z. Wong, 1988. Spontaneous mutation rates to new alleles at tandem repetitive hypervariable loci in human DNA. Nature 332: 278–281.
Jeffreys, A.J., K. Tamaki, A. MacLeod, D.G. Monckton, D.L. Neil & J.A.L. Armour, 1994. Complex gene conversion events in germline mutation at human minisatellites. Nature Genetics 6: 136–145.
Krane, D.E., R.W. Allen, S.A. Sawyer, D.A. Petrov & D.L. Hartl, 1992. Genetic differences at four DNA typing loci in Finnish, Italian and mixed Caucasian populations. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 89: 10583–10587.
Lempert, R., 1991. Some caveats concerning DNA as criminal identification evidence: with thanks to the Reverend Bayes. Cardozo Law Rev. 13: 303–341.
Lewontin, R.C. & D.L. Hartl, 1991. Population genetics in forensic DNA typing. Science 254: 1745–1750.
Lindley, D.V., 1990. The present position in Bayesian statistics. Statist. Sci. 5: 44–89.
Morton, N.E., 1992. Genetic structure of forensic populations. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 89: 2556–2560.
Morton, N.E., 1993a. DNA in court. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 1: 172–178.
Morton, N.E., 1993b. Kinship bioassay on hypervariable loci in blacks and caucasians. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 90: 1892–1896.
Nichols, R.A. & D.J. Balding, 1991. Effects of population structure on DNA fingerprint analysis in forensic science. Heredity 66: 297–302.
Robertson, B. & T. Vignaux, 1992. Why the NRC report on DNA is wrong. New Law J.: 1619–1621.
Roeder, K., 1994. DNA fingerprinting: a review of the controversy. Statist. Sci. 9: 222–278.
Wall, W.J., R. Williamson, M. Petrou, D. Papaioannou & B.H. Parkin, 1993. Variation of short tandem repeats within and between populations. Hum. Molec. Genet. 2: 1023–1029.
Waye, J.S. & B. Eng, 1994. Allelic stability of a VNTR locus 3′αHVR: Linkage disequilibrium with the common α-thalassaemia-1 deletion of South-East Asia (-SEA/). Hum. Heredity 44: 61–67.
Weir, B.S., 1993a. Forensic Population Genetics and the National Research Council (NRC). Am. J. Hum. Genet. 52: 437–440.
Weir, B.S., 1993b. Independence tests for VNTR alleles defined as quantile bins. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 53: 1107–1113.
Yasuda, N., 1968. An extension of Wahlund's principle to evaluate mating type frequency. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 20: 1–23.
PubMed Copyright information
© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995