Forensic investigation approaches of searching relatives in DNA databases.
CODIS
DNA database
SNPs
STRs
Y-STR database
familial searching
genotyping technologies
investigative genetic genealogy
legislation
privacy concerns
Journal
Journal of forensic sciences
ISSN: 1556-4029
Titre abrégé: J Forensic Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0375370
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2021
Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
10
08
2020
revised:
11
09
2020
accepted:
05
10
2020
pubmed:
3
11
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
entrez:
2
11
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There are several indirect database searching approaches to identify the potential source of a forensic biological sample. These DNA-based approaches are familial searching, Y-STR database searching, and investigative genetic genealogy (IGG). The first two strategies use forensic DNA databases managed by the government, and the latter uses databases managed by private citizens or companies. Each of these search strategies relies on DNA testing to identify relatives of the donor of the crime scene sample, provided such profiles reside in the DNA database(s). All three approaches have been successfully used to identify the donor of biological evidence, which assisted in solving criminal cases or identifying unknown human remains. This paper describes and compares these approaches in terms of genotyping technologies, searching methods, database structures, searching efficiency, data quality, data security, and costs, and raises some potential privacy and legal considerations for further discussion by stakeholders and scientists. Y-STR database searching and IGG are advantageous since they are able to assist in more cases than familial searching readily identifying distant relatives. In contrast, familial searching can be performed more readily with existing laboratory systems. Every country or state may have its own unique economic, technical, cultural, and legal considerations and should decide the best approach(es) to fit those circumstances. Regardless of the approach, the ultimate goal should be the same: generate investigative leads and solve active and cold criminal cases to public safety, under stringent policies and security practices designed to protect the privacy of its citizenry.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33136341
doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.14615
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
430-443Subventions
Organisme : National Institute of Justice
ID : 2019-DU-BX-0046
Organisme : Office of Justice Programs
Organisme : U.S. Department of Justice
Informations de copyright
© 2020 American Academy of Forensic Sciences.
Références
Federal Bureau of Investigation. CODIS - NDIS statistics. https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/ndis-statistics. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
GEDMatch. https://www.gedmatch.com/. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Miller G. Familial DNA testing scores a win in serial killer case. Science. 2010;329(5989):262. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.329.5989.262
Xinhua News Agency. Distant cousin's DNA locked up the suspect, Gao Chengyong. http://www.xinhuanet.com/politics/2016-08/30/c_129261666.htm. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
New York Times. Man thought to be China’s Jack the Ripper Is arrested. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/30/world/asia/china-jack-the-ripper-gao-chengyong.html. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Kaiser J. We will find you: DNA search used to nab Golden State Killer can home in on about 60% of white Americans. Science. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav7021.
Kayser M. Forensic use of Y-chromosome DNA: a general overview. Hum Genet. 2017;136(5):621-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-017-1776-9.
Evett IW. Evaluating DNA profiles in a case where the defence is “It was my brother”. J Forensic Sci Soc. 1992;32(1):5-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-7368(92)73041-2.
Bieber FR, Brenner CH, Lazer D. Human genetics. Finding criminals through DNA of their relatives. Science. 2006;312(5778):1315-6. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1122655.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. Correctional populations in United States, 1996. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs; 1996. p. 62.
Ge J, Budowle B. Kinship index variations among populations and thresholds for familial searching. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37474. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037474.
Myers SP, Timken MD, Piucci ML, Sims GA, Greenwald MA, Weigand JJ, et al. Searching for first-degree familial relationships in California's offender DNA database: validation of a likelihood ratio-based approach. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2011;5(5):493-500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2010.10.010.
Ge J, Chakraborty R, Eisenberg A, Budowle B. Comparisons of familial DNA database searching strategies. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(6):1448-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01867.x.
Anderson J, Strang L, Matthies C, Piquado T. Forensic familial and moderate stringency DNA searches: policies and practices in the United States, England, and Wales. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation; 2019.
NBC News. New DNA technology helps solve Santa Ana child rape case, officials say. https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/dna-technology-solves-santa-ana-child-rape-case/1891699/. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Granja R, Machado H. Ethical controversies of familial searching: The views of stakeholders in the United Kingdom and in Poland. Sci Technol Hum Values. 2019;44(6):1068-92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243919828219.
García Ó, Crespillo M, Yurrebaso I. Suspects identification through “familial searching” in DNA databases of criminal interest. Social, ethical and scientific implications. Span J Leg Med. 2017;43(1):26-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.remle.2017.02.002.
RTI International. Familial DNA searching: current approaches. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International; 2015.
Sanlian Life magazine. How was the murderer of the Southern Medical University 28 years ago found in three days? https://finance.sina.cn/2020-02-26/detail-iimxxstf4616946.d.html. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Liu H, Li X, Mulero J, Carbonaro A, Short M, Ge J. A convenient guideline to determine if two Y-STR profiles are from the same lineage. Electrophoresis. 2016;37(12):1659-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/elps.201500566.
Schellberg T. Announcement of the 4th DNA hit of the year. Human Identification Solutions (HIDS) Virtual Conference. 2020. https://wwwthermofishercom/us/en/home/industrial/forensics/human-identification/human-identification-solutions-conference-2020.html. Accessed 5 Oct 2020.
Ge J, Sun H, Li H, Liu C, Yan J, Budowle B. Future directions of forensic DNA databases. Croat Med J. 2014;55(2):163-6. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2014.55.163.
Willuweit S, Roewer L. The new Y chromosome haplotype reference database. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2015;15:43-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.11.024.
Promega. Under the microscope - Colleen Fitzpatrick. https://www.ishinews.com/under-the-microscope-colleen-fitzpatrick/. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Investigation Discovery. DNA test stunningly accurate as serial hammer slayer with predicted last name arrested. https://www.investigationdiscovery.com/crimefeed/id-shows/dna-test-stunningly-accurate-as-serial-hammer-slayer-with-predicted-last-name-arrested. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
KOTA TV.Rapid City police solve a cold case after 51 years. https://www.kotatv.com/content/news/Rapid-City-Police-solve-a-cold-case-51-years-later-511436101.html. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Erlich Y, Shor T, Pe'er I, Carmi S. Identity inference of genomic data using long-range familial searches. Science. 2018;362(6415):690-4. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau4832.
Ge J, Budowle B. How many familial relationship testing results could be wrong? PLoS Genet. 2020;16(8):e1008929. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1008929.
Wickenheiser RA. Forensic genealogy, bioethics and the Golden State Killer case. Forensic Sci Int. 2019;1:114-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2019.07.003.
Katsanis SH. Pedigrees and perpetrators: Uses of DNA and genealogy in forensic investigations. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2020;21:535-64. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-genom-111819-084213.
Greytak EM, Moore C, Armentrout SL. Genetic genealogy for cold case and active investigations. Forensic Sci Int. 2019;299:103-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.03.039.
Bettinger BT, Perl J.The shared cM oroject 3.0 tool v4. 2018. https://dnapainter.com/tools/sharedcmv4. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Verogen. GEDmatch partners with genomics firm. https://Verogen.com/gedmatch-partners-with-genomics-firm/. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Washington Business Journal. The Reston company cracking cold police cases is coming to your TV. https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2020/05/06/the-reston-company-cracking-cold-police-cases-is.html. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Thomson J, Clayton T, Cleary J, Gleeson M, Kennett D, Leonard M, et al. The effectiveness of forensic genealogy techniques in The united kingdom - an experimental assessment. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Ser. 2019;7(1):765-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigss.2019.10.169.
Tillmar A, Sjolund P, Lundqvist B, Klippmark T, Algenas C, Green H. Whole-genome sequencing of human remains to enable genealogy DNA database searches - A case report. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2020;46:102233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102233.
Samuel G, Kennett D. The impact of investigative genetic genealogy: perceptions of UK professional and public stakeholders. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2020;48:102366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102366.
Liu J, Ji A, Li C, Wang G. Research progress of forensic genealogy analysis. Forensic Science and Technology. 2019;44(3):189-94. https://doi.org/10.16467/j.1008-3650.2019.03.001.
Zhu B, Guo Y, Li S, Liu C, Cong B. New genetic sleuthing tool: Forensic genealogy. Chin Sci Bull. 2019;64(22):2274-2278. https://doi.org/10.1360/N972019-00266.
Wang DY, Gopinath S, Lagacé RE, Norona W, Hennessy LK, Short ML, et al. Developmental validation of the GlobalFiler® Express PCR Amplification Kit: A 6-dye multiplex assay for the direct amplification of reference samples. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2015;19:148-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.07.013.
Gopinath S, Zhong C, Nguyen V, Ge J, Lagacé RE, Short ML, et al. Developmental validation of the Yfiler® Plus PCR Amplification Kit: An enhanced Y-STR multiplex for casework and database applications. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2016;24:164-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.07.006.
Ensenberger MG, Lenz KA, Matthies LK, Hadinoto GM, Schienman JE, Przech AJ, et al. Developmental validation of the PowerPlex® fusion 6C system. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2016;21:134-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.12.011.
Jäger AC, Alvarez ML, Davis CP, Guzmán E, Han Y, Way L, et al. Developmental validation of the MiSeq FGx Forensic Genomics System for targeted next generation sequencing in forensic DNA casework and database laboratories. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2017;28:52-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.01.011.
Alonso A, Barrio PA, Muller P, Kocher S, Berger B, Martin P, et al. Current state-of-art of STR sequencing in forensic genetics. Electrophoresis. 2018;39(21):2655-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/elps.201800030.
Dagnall CL, Morton LM, Hicks BD, Li S, Zhou W, Karlins E, et al. Successful use of whole genome amplified DNA from multiple source types for high-density Illumina SNP microarrays. BMC Genom. 2018;19(1):182. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-018-4572-6.
Bode Technology. Bode FGS - DNA testing & analysis frequently asked questions (FAQs). https://www.bodetech.com/frequently-asked-questions/109. Accessed 23 Jun 2020.
Department of Justice. Department of Justice announces interim policy on emerging method to generate leads for unsolved violent crimes. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-announces-interim-policy-emerging-method-generate-leads-unsolved-violent. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
United States Department of Justice. Interim policy, forensic genetic genealogical DNA analysis and searching. 2019. https://www.justice.gov/olp/page/file/1204386/download. Accessed 23 Jun 2020.
Callaghan TF. Responsible genetic genealogy. Science. 2019;366(6462):155. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz6578.
Karantzali E, Rosmaraki P, Kotsakis A, Le Roux-Le Pajolec MG, Fitsialos G. The effect of FBI CODIS Core STR Loci expansion on familial DNA database searching. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2019;43:102129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.07.008.
Thermo Fisher Scientific. How to determine if two Y-STR haplotypes are from the same male lineage. https://www.thermofisher.com/blog/behindthebench/how-to-determine-if-two-y-str-haplotypes-are-from-the-same-male-lineage/. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Ge J, Budowle B, Aranda XG, Planz JV, Eisenberg AJ, Chakraborty R. Mutation rates at Y chromosome short tandem repeats in Texas populations. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2009;3(3):179-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2009.01.007.
Ge J, Budowle B, Planz JV, Eisenberg AJ, Ballantyne J, Chakraborty R. US forensic Y-chromosome short tandem repeats database. Leg Med. 2010;12(6):289-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2010.07.006.
Ballantyne KN, Keerl V, Wollstein A, Choi Y, Zuniga SB, Ralf A, et al. A new future of forensic Y-chromosome analysis: rapidly mutating Y-STRs for differentiating male relatives and paternal lineages. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2012;6(2):208-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2011.04.017.
Ge J, Eisenberg A, Yan J, Chakraborty R, Budowle B. Pedigree likelihood ratio for lineage markers. Int J Legal Med. 2011;125(4):519-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-010-0514-9.
Ball CA, Barber MJ, Byrnes J, Carbonetto P, Chahine KG, Curtis RE, et al. Ancestry DNA matching white paper. Technical report. AncestryDNA. 2016. https://www.ancestry.com/corporate/sites/default/files/AncestryDNA-Matching-White-Paper.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2020.
Henn BM, Hon L, Macpherson JM, Eriksson N, Saxonov S, Pe'er I, et al. Cryptic distant relatives are common in both isolated and cosmopolitan genetic samples. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e34267. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034267.
Manichaikul A, Mychaleckyj JC, Rich SS, Daly K, Sale M, Chen WM. Robust relationship inference in genome-wide association studies. Bioinformatics. 2010;26(22):2867-73. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btq559.
Al-Khudhair A, Qiu S, Wyse M, Chowdhury S, Cheng X, Bekbolsynov D, et al. Inference of distant genetic relations in humans using “1000 genomes”. Genome Biol Evol. 2015;7(2):481-92. https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evv003.
DNA Resource. Global DNA databases. http://www.dnaresource.com/resources.html. Accessed 10 Sept 2020.
National DNA database statistics. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-dna-database-statistics. Accessed 23 Jun 2020.
Hares DR. Selection and implementation of expanded CODIS core loci in the United States. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2015;17:33-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.03.006.
Phillips C. A genomic audit of newly-adopted autosomal STRs for forensic identification. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2017;29:193-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.04.011.
National Institute of Standards and Technology. Core STR loci used in human identity testing. https://strbase.nist.gov/coreSTRs.htm. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Budowle B, Moretti TR, Niezgoda SJ, Brown BL, editors. CODIS and PCR-based short tandem repeat loci: law enforcement tools. Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Human Identification; 1998 June 10-12; Innsbruck, Austria. Madison, WI: Promega Corporation, 1998.
Budowle B, Ge J, Aranda XG, Planz JV, Eisenberg AJ, Chakraborty R. Texas population substructure and its impact on estimating the rarity of Y STR haplotypes from DNA evidence. J Forensic Sci. 2009;54(5):1016-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01105.x.
Ge JY, Yan JW, Xie Q, Sun HY, Zhou HG, Li B. Development of Chinese forensic Y-STR DNA database. Fa Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2013;29(3):212-5, 21.
Snyder HN. Arrest in the United States, 1990-2010. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, US Department of Justice; 2012.
Alexia Cooper ELS. Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980-2008. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, US Department of Justice; 2011.
Regalado A. More than 26 million people have taken an at-home ancestry test. MIT Technology Review. 2019. https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/02/11/103446/more-than-26-million-people-have-taken-an-at-home-ancestry-test/. Accessed 5 Oct 2020.
Skeva S, Larmuseau MH, Shabani M. Review of policies of companies and databases regarding access to customers’ genealogy data for law enforcement purposes. Per Med. 2020;17(2):141-53. https://doi.org/10.2217/pme-2019-0100.
BuzzFeed News. One of the biggest at-home DNA testing companies is working with the FBI. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/salvadorhernandez/family-tree-dna-fbi-investigative-genealogy-privacy. Accessed 10 Sept 2020.
Ram N, Roberts JL. Forensic genealogy and the power of defaults. Nat Biotechnol. 2019;37(7):707-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0172-5.
FamilyTreeDNA privacy statement. https://www.familytreedna.com/legal/privacy-statement. Accessed 23 June 2020.
Ram N, Guerrini CJ, McGuire AL. Genealogy databases and the future of criminal investigation. Science. 2018;360(6393):1078-9. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau1083.
Greytak EM, Moore C, Armentrout SL. RE: Identity inference of genomic data using long-range familial searches. Erlich et al. Science 2018;362(6415):690-4. Science. eLetter. 2018. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/362/6415/690/tab-e-letters. Accessed 5 Oct 2020.
Syndercombe Court D. Forensic genealogy: Some serious concerns. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2018;36:203-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.07.011.
Ellenbogen P, Narayanan A. Identification of anonymous DNA using genealogical triangulation. bioRxiv. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1101/531269.
Gymrek M, McGuire AL, Golan D, Halperin E, Erlich Y. Identifying personal genomes by surname inference. Science. 2013;339(6117):321-4. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1229566.
Budowle B, Masibay A, Anderson SJ, Barna C, Biega L, Brenneke S, et al. STR primer concordance study. Forensic Sci Int. 2001;124(1):47-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(01)00563-1.
Davis C, Ge J, King J, Malik N, Weirich V, Eisenberg AJ, et al. Variants observed for STR locus SE33: a concordance study. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2012;6(4):494-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2011.12.002.
Hong H, Xu L, Liu J, Jones WD, Su Z, Ning B, et al. Technical reproducibility of genotyping SNP arrays used in genome-wide association studies. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44483. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044483.
DNA Identification Act. https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/829/text. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Edge MD, Coop G. Attacks on genetic privacy via uploads to genealogical databases. Elife. 2020;9:e51810. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51810.
Ney P, Ceze L, Kohno T. Genotype extraction and false relative attacks: security risks to third-party genetic genealogy services beyond identity inference. Preprint Posted. 2020;10(29):19.
MarketWatch. MyHeritage hack affects 92 million customers, reveals more risks with genealogy sites. https://www.MarketWatch.com/story/myheritage-dna-site-hack-reveals-risks-associated-with-genealogy-sites-2018-06-06. Accessed 10 Sept 2020.
TechCrunch. GEDmatch confirms data breach after users’ DNA profile data made available to police. https://TechCrunch.com/2020/07/22/gedmatch-investigating-dna-profile-law-enforcement/. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
CBS News. Private equity wants to own your DNA. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/blackstone-private-equity-ancestry-com-dna/. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. Freedom of Information/Privacy Act. https://www.fbi.gov/services/information-management/foipa Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Greytak EM, Kaye DH, Budowle B, Moore C, Armentrout SL. Privacy and genetic genealogy data. Science. 2018;361(6405):857. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav0330.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. Frequently asked questions on CODIS and NDIS. https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Murphy E, Tong J. The racial composition of forensic DNA databases. Calif Law Rev. 2019;108:19-54. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3477974.
Sokhansanj BA. Beyond protecting genetic privacy: understanding genetic discrimination through its disparate impact on racial minorities. Columbia Journal of Race and Law. 2012;2:279.
Hares DR. Expanding the CODIS core loci in the United States. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2012;6(1):e52-e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2011.04.012.
Graydon M, Cholette F, Ng L-K. Inferring ethnicity using 15 autosomal STR loci-Comparisons among populations of similar and distinctly different physical traits. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2009;3(4):251-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2009.03.002.
McClatchy. This nation faces a DNA dilemma: Whether to notify people carrying cancer genes. https://www.McClatchy.c.com/news/nation-world/article213014904.html. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
Kim K, Mohr AO-NE. 2016 Law enforcement use of social media survey. A Joint Publication by the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Urban Institute. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2017. p.1-22.
Guerrini CJ, Robinson JO, Petersen D, McGuire AL. Should police have access to genetic genealogy databases? Capturing the Golden State Killer and other criminals using a controversial new forensic technique. PLoS Biol. 2018;16(10):e2006906. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2006906.
Gierlack K, Williams S, LaTourrette T, Anderson JM, Mayer LA. License plate readers for law enforcement: Opportunities and obstacles. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation; 2014.
State of Utah. H.B. 231 Genetic Information Amendments. https://le.utah.gov/~2020/bills/static/HB0231.html. Accessed 23 Jun 2020.
The Sacramento Bee. Who’s looking at your DNA data? California lawmaker introduces genetic privacy bill. https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article240227106.html. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.
The PEW Charitable Trusts. DNA databases are boon to police but menace to privacy, critics say. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2020/02/20/dna-databases-are-boon-to-police-but-menace-to-privacy-critics-say. Accessed 11 Sept 2020.