Forensic Science International: Genetics
Volume 2, Issue 3 , Pages 198-204, June 2008

Resolving relationship tests that show ambiguous STR results using autosomal SNPs as supplementary markers

  • C. Phillips

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Genetics Unit, Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
    • Genomic Medicine Group, Hospital Clinico Universitario, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Forensic Genetics Unit, Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, 15704, Spain.
  • ,
  • M. Fondevila

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Genetics Unit, Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
  • ,
  • M. García-Magariños

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Genetics Unit, Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
  • ,
  • A. Rodriguez

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Genetics Unit, Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
  • ,
  • A. Salas

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Genetics Unit, Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
    • Genomic Medicine Group, Hospital Clinico Universitario, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
  • ,
  • Á. Carracedo

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Genetics Unit, Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
    • Genomic Medicine Group, Hospital Clinico Universitario, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
  • ,
  • M.V. Lareu

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Genetics Unit, Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
    • Genomic Medicine Group, Hospital Clinico Universitario, Santiago de Compostela, Spain

Received 9 January 2008; received in revised form 11 February 2008; accepted 12 February 2008. published online 28 March 2008.

Abstract 

When using a standard battery of STRs for relationship testing a small proportion of analyses can give ambiguous results – where the claimed relationship cannot be confirmed by a high enough paternity index or excluded with fully incompatible genotypes. The majority of such cases arise from unknowingly testing a brother of the true father and observing only a small number of exclusions that can each be interpreted as one- or two-step mutations. Although adding extra STRs might resolve a proportion of cases, there are few properly validated extra STRs available, while the commonly added hypervariable SE33 locus is four times more mutable than average, increasing the risk of ambiguous results. We have found SNPs in large multiplexes are much more informative for both low initial probabilities or ambiguous exclusions and at the same time provide a more reliable genotyping approach for the highly degraded DNA encountered in many identification cases. Eight relationship cases are outlined where the addition of SNP data resolved analyses that had remained ambiguous even with extended STR typing. In addition we have made simulations to ascertain the frequency of failing to obtain exclusions or conclusive probabilities of paternity with different marker sets when a brother of the true father is tested. Results indicate that SNPs are statistically more efficient than STRs in resolving cases that distinguish first-degree relatives in deficient pedigrees.

Keywords: Paternity testing, STR analysis, SNP, Single nucleotide polymorphism, Forensic DNA typing

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1872-4973(08)00035-5

doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2008.02.002

Forensic Science International: Genetics
Volume 2, Issue 3 , Pages 198-204, June 2008