![Page 1: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects
2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI MeetingNovember, 2010November, 2010Manchester, VTManchester, VT
Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhDMark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhDCybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PACybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA
Cybergenetics © 2003-2010Cybergenetics © 2003-2010
![Page 2: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Coping with uncertainty
• Reproducible DNA data exhibit stochastic variation• Probability models can capture stochastic effects• Genotypes inferred from uncertain data are probability distributions (e.g., CPI)
• Science expects us to account for stochastic effects• The law expects us to testify within our certainty• The likelihood ratio (LR) meets both demands• The LR expresses genotype uncertainty, reflecting the underlying data uncertainty
![Page 3: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
PCR is a random process
p 1 - p
PCR efficiency is not 100% efficient. A strand copies with probability p, and doesn't copy with probability 1-p.
COPY NO COPY
![Page 4: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
STR peak is a random variablep = 80%, n = 6
1,298 2,900
One amplification Another amplification
![Page 5: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
STR peak height measurementreflects probability distribution
mean = 2,145
stdev = 284
![Page 6: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Relative peak certainty:coefficient of variation
stdev = 12
mean = 85
CV = 14% CV =
standarddeviation
meanvalue
![Page 7: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Four times the peak height,gives twice the peak certainty
stdev = 25
mean = 350
CV = 7% CV =
standarddeviation
meanvalue
![Page 8: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
STR peaks are random variables
![Page 9: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
To interpret quantitative data,some use a qualitative threshold
Over threshold,peaks are treatedas allele events.
Under threshold,alleles do not exist.
list ofincluded alleles
![Page 10: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Thresholds introduce error
![Page 11: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Threshold = 50 rfu
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
50:50 30:70 10:90
DNA mixture ratio
1000 pg
500 pg
250 pg
125 pg
False allele exclusions
![Page 12: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
2010 SWGDAM Guidelines
When every peak is under threshold,all the data disappears.
No genotype,no match score,nothing left to say.
Raising thestochasticthreshold.
![Page 13: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Threshold = 200 rfu
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
50:50 30:70 10:90
DNA mixture ratio
1000 pg
500 pg
250 pg
125 pg
Higher false exclusion rate
![Page 14: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
SWGDAM 2010 – Mixtures3.2.2. If a stochastic threshold based on peak height is not used in the evaluation of DNA typing results, the laboratory must establish alternative criteria (e.g., quantitation values or use of a probabilistic genotype approach) for addressing potential stochastic amplification. The criteria must be supported by empirical data and internal validation and must be documented in the standard operating procedures.
• higher peak threshold discards information• probability modeling preserves information
![Page 15: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Probability modeling• Bayes Theorem: addresses scientific uncertainty• uses likelihood function to update probability• joint likelihood combines independent evidence
• likelihood: how well parameters explain the data• STR data: must explain every peak (all rfu)• likelihood gives probability at one peak: genotype allele prediction vs. peak height• joint likelihood at all peaks: multiply together the individual peak likelihoods
![Page 16: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Compare genotype pattern vs. data
![Page 17: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Overcome stochastic effectsComputers can solve for genotype probabilities and other random variables, like peak variation
By modeling peak variationas just another parameter,computers can overcomeDNA stochastic effects
![Page 18: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
TrueAllele® Casework• quantitative computer interpretation• statistical search of probability model• preserves all identification information• objectively infer genotype, then match
• any number of mixture contributors• stutter, imbalance, degraded DNA• calculates uncertainty of every peak
• created in 1999, now in version 25• used on 100,000 evidence samples• available as product, service or both
![Page 19: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Commonwealth v. Foley
Score Method13 thousand inclusion
23 million obligate allele189 billion TrueAllele
• peak threshold discards information• probability modeling preserves information
![Page 20: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Likelihood Comparison
Quantitative TrueAllele likelihoodQuantitative TrueAllele likelihood
focuses probability on true genotypefocuses probability on true genotype
Inclusion method likelihoodInclusion method likelihood
disperses probability across incorrect allele pairsdisperses probability across incorrect allele pairs
![Page 21: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Preserve vs. Discard
7.037.03
6.246.2413.2613.26
MW Perlin, MM Legler, CE Spencer, JL Smith, WP Allan, JL Belrose, BW Duceman. Validating Trueallele DNA Mixture Interpretation. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 2011.
Quantitative TrueAlleleQuantitative TrueAllele
Inclusion methodInclusion method
![Page 22: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
SWGDAM 2010 – Mixtures3.4.3.1. If composite profiles (i.e., generated by combining typing results obtained from multiple amplifications and/or injections) are used, the laboratory should establish guidelines for the generation of the composite result. When separate extracts from different locations on a given evidentiary item are combined prior to amplification, the resultant DNA profile is not considered a composite profile. Unless there is a reasonable expectation of sample(s) originating from a common source (e.g., duplicate vaginal swabs or a bone), allelic data from separate extractions from different locations on a given evidentiary item should not be combined into a composite profile. The laboratory should establish guidelines for determining the suitability of developing composite profiles from such samples.
• joint likelihood function combines evidence• probability modeling preserves information
![Page 23: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Regina v. Broughton
• low template mixture• three DNA contributors• triplicate amplification• post-PCR enhancement
vWA locus data
• inconclusive human result• TrueAllele interpretation
![Page 24: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Regina v. BroughtonG
enoy
pe p
roba
bilil
ity (
vWA
)
6x
Score Methodnothing human inclusion
3.6 million TrueAllele computer
• joint likelihood function combines evidence• probability modeling preserves information
![Page 25: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Preserve vs. Discard
• peak threshold discards information - 70% of the time• quantitative likelihood preserves information - every time
![Page 26: Overcoming DNA Stochastic Effects 2010 NEAFS & NEDIAI Meeting November, 2010 Manchester, VT Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081602/5513f03255034646298b5fe2/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Conclusions
• quantitative data has stochastic effects• model data with joint likelihood function• probability modeling preserves information• and can statistically combine DNA evidence
• exact modeling of peak variation can replace inexact thresholds to scientifically overcome stochastic effects
http://www.cybgen.com/information/presentations.shtml