2 Person Mixture #3 Questioned samples from bomb remains, no references.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics.
Advertisements

Forensic Bioinformatics (
Peak Height Ratios in Forensic STR Analyses: Pattern of Occurrence & Effects of Concentration Data from: Illinois State Police Laboratory Illinois State.
Attaching statistical weight to DNA test results 1.Single source samples 2.Relatives 3.Substructure 4.Error rates 5.Mixtures/allelic drop out 6.Database.
Cold Hit Statistics NRC I How does it work? Searches are done with a subset of available loci. A second set of different genetic markers are used to confirm.
3 Person Example #2 Suspect Boxer Shorts (The Ladies Man)
The essentials managers need to know about Excel
Thomas A. Stewart Literacy Test (OSSLT) Prep Guide 2013
3 Person Mixture #3 The Hickey Case Consensual or Suspect??
Introduction To 2 and 3 Person Mixtures How the RMP Can Help With Complex Mixtures.
CREATING A PAYMENT REQUEST FOR A NEW VENDOR
Using the Subjunctive Noun Clauses.
The T Distribution ©Dr. B. C. Paul Wasn’t the Herby Assembly Line Problem Fun But there is one little problem But there is one little problem We.
How to validate in Budget Manager Hopefully now you have reached this stage you will have downloaded the inpatient and outpatients excel files for you.
Addition, Subtraction, and Multiplication of Polynomials
Outlook 2007: Advanced Mail Management Western Connecticut State University presents:
ANOVA Demo Part 2: Analysis Psy 320 Cal State Northridge Andrew Ainsworth PhD.
1 MA 1128: Lecture 05 – 9/12/14 Inequalities And Absolute Values.
Chapter 11: Probability of Compound Events
2 Person Mixture #4 Found Underwear Major/minor Mixture.
Stored procedures and views You can see definitions for stored procedures and views in the demo databases but you can’t change them. For views, expand.
A Teenager’s Guide To Asexuality Am I Ace?. Am I Asexual? You’re not into sex the way other people are. You’re not sure you really get what people mean.
Random Match Probability Statistics
Decision Rules. Decision Theory In the final part of the course we’ve been studying decision theory, the science of how to make rational decisions. So.
Welcome to this quick guide/presentation of M2TIEMPOS We’re an easy way to buy spare parts, engines and power.
Order of Operations And Real Number Operations
MA 1128: Lecture 08 – 6/6/13 Linear Equations from Graphs And Linear Inequalities.
From Anti-Scepticism to the Contingent A Priori Brian Weatherson Cornell University.
MA 1128: Lecture 06 – 2/15/11 Graphs Functions.
MA 1165: Special Assignment Completing the Square.
1 Person Mixture #1 The Alien Case (Type 0 Mixture)
Words and Actions Can Hurt
The Nature of Mathematical Reasoning
Deconvoluting Mixtures Using Proportional Allele Sharing What does it mean and how do you do it?
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & STATISTICS LECTURE 6: THE NORMAL DISTRIBUTION AND CONFIDENCE INTERVALS MSc(Addictions) Addictions Department.
Blogs – what, why and how? A blog is a web-log It is a simple website that anyone can setup without any advanced computer know-how It’s the future: blogs,
 How does the graph represent a gel? Each group filled in a ‘band’ that represents where different – sized DNA fragments would have migrated on a gel,
WHY Y’s? Strengths and Limitations of Male-Specific Y-STR Testing Jack Laird and Valerie Blackmore Senior Associates General Information Presentation Fall.
Forensic Statistics From the ground up…. Basics Interpretation Hardy-Weinberg equations Random Match Probability Likelihood Ratio Substructure.
Excel 2007 Part (2) Dr. Susan Al Naqshbandi
Proportions for the Binomial Distribution ©2005 Dr. B. C. Paul.
Statistical weights of mixed DNA profiles Forensic Bioinformatics ( Dan E. Krane, Wright State University, Dayton, OH Forensic DNA.
2 Person Mixture #2 Vaginal swab of Victim. Case Scenario Assault occurred in dorm room Suspect says it was consensual No other parties heard or saw anything.
3 Person Mixture #4 (Or is it 2?) The Hardest Mixture I Know.
HAWKES LEARNING SYSTEMS Students Matter. Success Counts. Copyright © 2013 by Hawkes Learning Systems/Quant Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Section 10.6.
How to: Hardy - Weinberg
Given the marginal cost, find the original cost equation. C ' ( x ) = 9 x 2 – 10 x + 7 ; fixed cost is $ 20. In algebra, we were told that what ever was.
Consolidate Consolidate Multiple Worksheets to a Single Sheet in Excel.
Table of Contents Factoring – Trinomials (a ≠ 1), Guess and Check It is assumed you already know how to factor trinomials where a = 1, that is, trinomials.
Downloading and Installing Autodesk Revit 2016
You don’t know what you don’t know But does it matter? Or is everything inconclusive?
Time series Model assessment. Tourist arrivals to NZ Period is quarterly.
Downloading and Installing Autodesk Inventor Professional 2015 This is a 4 step process 1.Register with the Autodesk Student Community 2.Downloading the.
TrueAllele ® Genetic Calculator: Implementation in the NYSP Crime Laboratory NYS DNA Subcommittee May 19, 2010 Barry Duceman, Ph.D New York State Police.
Grade Book Database Presentation Jeanne Winstead CINS 137.
Statistical Analysis of DNA Simple Repeats –Identical length and sequence agat agat agat agat agat Compound Repeats –Two or more adjacent simple repeats.
Professor Bruce Budowle Executive Director of the Institute of Applied Genetics Department of Molecular and Medical Genetics University of North Texas.
Open Access DNA Database Duquesne University March, 2013 Pittsburgh, PA Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics ©
When the program is first started a wizard will start to setup your Lemming App. Enter your company name and owner in the fields designated “Company Name”
Exploring Forensic Scenarios with TrueAllele ® Mixture Automation 59th Annual Meeting American Academy of Forensic Sciences February, 2007 Mark W Perlin,
THE “COLLEGES I AM THINKING ABOUT” LIST IN YOUR FAMILY CONNECTIONS ACCOUNT.
The T-Test Are our results reliable enough to support a conclusion?
Data summary – “alleles” Threshold Over threshold, peaks are labeled as allele events All-or-none allele peaks, each given equal status Allele Pair 8,
Week 1 Real Numbers and Their Properties (Section 1.6, 1.7, 1.8)
Disputed DNA Stats for a Low-level Sample: A Case Study By Dan Krane – Carrie Rowland –
Seventh Annual Prescriptions for Criminal Justice Forensics Program Fordham University School of Law June 3, 2016 DNA Panel.
Statistical Analysis of DNA
Statistical Weights of DNA Profiles
Overcoming Bias in DNA Mixture Interpretation
David W. Bauer1, PhD Nasir Butt2, PhD Jeffrey Oblock2
Presentation transcript:

2 Person Mixture #3 Questioned samples from bomb remains, no references

Scenario Pieces of wire were recovered from bomb Three samples gave DNA profiles Two samples each gave a different predominate Major profile – Unknown #1 – Unknown #2 The third sample is a rough 50/50 mixture “consistent with 2 persons”

Swab of Wire Ends (Item 1)

Swab of Wire Twist (Item 2)

Swab of Wire Twist (Item 3)

What’s your take on this data? Countdown 30 0 of 30 1.We can’t do anything because all samples are mixtures 2.We can compare the major profiles to the 50/50 mixture 3.There’s no references so we don’t do anything 4.If it weren’t for these interactive questions I’d be asleep

Setting up the interpretation Using the “Popout calls” feature, I very quickly generate the major profile for Item 1, and rename it Unknown #1 Then I do the same thing for Item 2 For D8, I just want the 13 here for the major

Combine the Samples “Combine Sources” Gives a new table that has the two single source derived profiles and the mixture (I could generate a CMF right now for CODIS for the two SS profiles)

The Data Table At this point, we’re left with the mixture of Item 3 to consider

Match to Unknown #1 Not all of Unknown #1 alleles are found in the mixture Since I previously described it as “consistent with 2 persons” he is excluded

Match to Unknown #2 All alleles of Unknown #2 are present But it’s a 50/50 mixture and you can’t assume anything How do you do the stats? (if needed)

Why this mixture, there are no references? What better time to do a stat then when you have no reference? Investigators really want to know if there are any connections between these three items of evidence If three people were involved instead of 1 or 2, maybe that is meaningful to the investigation

More reasons for this mixture What can you learn about the contributor that is not Unknown #1 or #2? (Fine tune for a database/investigator? Every little bit helps) I needed an example of a 50/50 mixture and a scenario where you can’t assume anyone to show various ways to deal with it

Calculating the Stat Start at loci with the most information (it’s my default method) – do the 4 allele loci first Review the Egram – – All alleles above our (conservative) 300 rfu stochastic threshold (Except for FGA) – No obvious peak imbalance issues suggesting hidden third person – No signs of dropout, clean baseline, no hint of “uncalled” alleles (need GMID to see this)

CPI? Only one allele in the “Danger Zone” below 300 rfu You could just do a CPI and be done with it As long as you drop FGA SWGDAM would say it’s OK It takes about 2 clicks to calculate the stat this way

CPI? Just click the “Probability of Inclusion” button 1 in 100 million(ish) We had to drop FGA

CPI? But… We already decided that this isn’t an “indeterminate” mixture We decided there are 2 contributors CPI ignores lots of information in the mixture

Let’s Use RMP Instead This is a great example for an RMP that uses several “flavors” of RMP 50% PHR eliminates some options for some loci – so rRMP Some loci cannot be restricted – all possible genotypes are viable – so uRMP One locus needs mRMP (I’m going to try to convince you that the “flavor” of RMP doesn’t matter)

How to calculate Under “Operations” just choose “Mixture Frequency” and restrict globally

“Restrict Globally” I just said that I’ll click a box that does a restricted RMP at every locus I also said that some loci will have an unrestricted RMP Remember, if all genotypes are viable, it’s an uRMP even if you thought you were doing an rRMP

4 Allele loci THO1 D18 All combinations of contributors (and therefore all genotypes) are possible – 6 total

4 Allele Loci So for THO1 and D18, this stat is actually an “unrestricted” RMP, as all options are possible Based on our calculation, you end up seeing all combinations on the stat page (I realize you can’t read this but 6 types there)

4 Allele Loci This approach gives the same answer as the “CPI” based math By that I mean if you “sum ‘em and square ‘em” and then “throw out the homozygotes” you get the exact same number for the probability at these two loci as if you calculate all genotypes individually and add them up

3 Allele Loci We have three “categories” of 3 Allele Loci Unrestricted RMP – TPOX – vWA Restricted RMP – D21 – D5 Modified RMP – FGA (<300 allele) – We’ll come back to this one at the end

Unrestricted 3 Allele Loci vWA TPOX

Unrestricted 3 Allele Loci TPOX will be the example At 50% PHR, only 4 of 6 possible combinations are viable But all possible genotypes are represented

Unrestricted 3 Allele Loci If we change the PHR to 30%, all combinations show up, but there are no new genotypes New options with phr<50% A AB B A C C

Unrestricted 3 Allele Loci TPOX and vWA have all genotypes in the stat Homozygotes are allowed In a CPI stat, you could just “sum ‘em and square ‘em” and be OK, because the homozygotes don’t change the assumption of the number of contributors But I won’t get the same answer as “CPI” for this locus

Unrestricted 3 Allele Loci I won’t get the same answer here because we calculate the homozygote types the “long” way: p 2 + p(1-p)Θ But if I set Θ = 0, I would get the same answer as a plain old CPI calculation at these loci

Unrestricted 3 Allele Loci Again, I know you can’t read this The point is just to show that vWA and TPOX have 6 distinct genotypes in their stat, the same as THO1 and D18 (the 4 allele loci)

Restricted 3 Allele Loci D21 D5

Restricted 3 Allele Loci For D5, we can’t restrict by much… Only the 11, 11 homozygote is not present in the stat, as that would require a 9, 13 heterozygote for the other contributor That person would then have a PHR of 37%

Restricted 3 Allele Loci For D21, we can limit the genotypes in the stat a bit more Only combinations: – 31.2, 32.2 and 30, 31.2 – 31.2 (homozygote) and 30, 32.2 Two homozygotes are not possible – 30, 30 (would require 31.2, 32.2 – 41% phr) – 32.2, 32.2 (would require 30, 31.2 – 37% phr) – But 31.2, 32.2 and 30, 31.2 are OK with another heterozygote

Restricted 3 Allele Loci So even though you can’t read this, the calculation for D21 and D5 is more informative than a CPI calculation at these loci

2 Allele Loci It’s pretty hard to limit any genotypes here There are 3 “families” of combinations that exist: – AA and AB (homozygote and heterozygote that share one allele) – AA and BB (2 homozygotes and no sharing) – AB and AB (2 heterozygotes that share the same type)

2 Allele Loci Even if a “family” of combinations is missing, there are only three genotypes possible, and they’ll pretty much show up no matter what Bottom line, it’s pretty hard to “restrict” anything with only 2 alleles

2 Allele Loci D19 is the only locus with all three “families” present and all three genotypes are allowed

2 Allele Loci The rest of the 2 allele loci all have only 2 combinations viable, but all three genotypes are possible So it’s an uRMP – we couldn’t restrict it CSF is the example

1 Allele Locus D8 has a single allele Should we “inc” the locus? – Drop it from the calculation? – Make it 1? That wouldn’t make any sense to me We are confident we are seeing a contribution from both contributors at every other locus in the profile

1 Allele Locus D8 is a very small molecular weight locus If I’m detecting a contribution from the minor contributor at CSF and D2 and FGA… why would that person not contribute here? Did the enzyme get lazy?

1 Allele Locus 2 Choices: – 13, 13 – 13, Any (We decided not to use the 3 rd choice – we’re not going to “inc” the locus – make it 1.0)

1 Allele Locus D8 got entered into the stat page as a 13, 13 I can change it by double clicking on that combination, and changing it to 13, Any

Back to FGA FGA has an allele <300 rfu (Danger Zone) So we need to account for a 26, Any type We treat this locus as a “modified” RMP – We define this as Allele, Any – Sum ‘em and square ‘em, then do all the other types that could go with the 26 allele

Back to FGA We sent the locus to the stat page as a “restricted” RMP To change that, double click each combination to remove it Then choose “modified RMP” option

Back to FGA Here is what you see in the stat box (p + q + r) 2 + [2(r)(1-(p + q + r))] or ( ) 2 + [2(26)(1-( ))] or CPI(kind of) + 2(r)(what you didn’t detect) r means 3 rd allele (the 26) 26 1 means <300

Final Stat 13 loci we tried to do rRMP, but lots ended up being uRMP as no type(s) dropped out D8 is the 13, Any and FGA is the modified RMP 1 in 823 Million (Moral = an RMP is an RMP) CPI was 1 in 100 Million(ish)

Or, Use LR H p = Unknown #2 and someone else H d = We have no clue who either one of those two guys are Just hit the LR button and pick the mixture

LR Stat 67 Billion times more likely