1. bookAHEAD OF PRINT
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
First Published
25 Nov 2011
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

The assessment of the efficacy of STRs panels recommended by the ISAG for canine pedigrees analysis for forensic casework

Published Online: 20 Nov 2021
Page range: -
Received: 23 Feb 2021
Accepted: 12 Oct 2021
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
First Published
25 Nov 2011
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

Canine DNA is widely used in forensic investigations, particularly in dog attacks cases on humans. Nowadays, STR markers are employed worldwide in forensic laboratories to test human and animal genotypes. In the study we analysed the effectiveness of panel – 18 STR as previously recommended by ISAG and the same panel with three additional markers – 21 STR, which has been recommended by ISAG as the core panel for dog identification since 2016. We calculated the PD, PID for these sets of panels and estimated RMP based on the DNA profile obtained during an investigation of a woman bitten by a dog. The high combined CPD value for 18 and 21 STRs showed values close to 1.0. The CPID value for theses panels was 5.2 × 10−10 to 6.4 × 10−14. Statistical analysis estimated the random DNA match, in the case of the woman bitten by a dog, with a probability of 4.3×1019 and 2.8×1022, using 18 and 21 STR panels respectively, and that the canine DNA profile from the crime scene originated from the suspected dog and not from another random dog. Our results show that both STR panels can be used effectively for individual identification and forensic casework.

Keywords

Arata S., Asahi A., Takeuchi Y., Mori Y. (2016). Microsatellite loci analysis for individual identification in Shiba Inu. J. Vet. Med. Sci., 78: 439–444. Search in Google Scholar

Berger B., Berger C., Hecht W., Hellmann A., Rohleder U., Schleenbecker U., Parson W. (2014). Validation of two canine STR multiplex-assays following the ISFG recommendations for non-human DNA analysis. Forensic. Sci. Int. Genet, 8: 90–100. Search in Google Scholar

Ciampolini R., Cecchi F., Spinetti I., Rocchi A., Biscarini F. (2017). The use of genetic markers to estimate relationships between dogs in the course of criminal investigations. BMC Res. Notes, 10: 414. Search in Google Scholar

Clarke M., Vandenberg N. (2010). Dog attack: the application of canine DNA profiling in forensic casework. Forensic Sci. Med. Pathol., 6: 151–157. Search in Google Scholar

DeNise S., Johnston E., Halverson J., Marshall K., Rosenfeld D., McKenna S., Sharp T., Eichmann C., Berger B., Parson W. (2004). A proposed nomenclature for 15 canine-specific polymorphic STR loci for forensic purposes. Int. J. Legal Med., 118: 249–266. Search in Google Scholar

Drumright B., Borg B., Rozzelle A., Donoghue L., Shanti C. (2020). Pediatric dog bite outcomes: infections and scars. Trauma Surg. Acute Care Open, 5:e000445. Search in Google Scholar

Duffy D.L., Hsu Y., Serpell J.A. (2008). Breed differences in canine aggression. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 114: 441–460. Search in Google Scholar

Eichmann C., Berge B., Parson W. (2006). Relevant aspects for forensic STR analysis of canine DNA: repeat-based nomenclature and sensitive PCR multiplexes. International Congress Series, Elsevier, 1288: 813–815. Search in Google Scholar

Forrester J. A., Weiser T. G., Forrester J. D. (2018). An update on fatalities due to venomous and nonvenomous animals in the United States (2008–2015). Wilderness Environ. Med., 29: 36–44. Search in Google Scholar

Gagliardi R., Llambí S., Garcia C., Arruga M.V. (2011). Microsatellite characterization of Cimarron Uruguayo dogs. Genet. Mol. Biol., 34: 165–168. Search in Google Scholar

Giacalone M., Giannuzzi M.R., Panarello D. (2018). DNA test to assess criminal responsibility: a Bayesian approach. Qual. Quant., 52: 2837–2853. Search in Google Scholar

Goleman M., Balicki I., Radko A., Jakubczak A., Fornal A. (2019). Genetic diversity of the Polish Hunting Dog population based on pedigree analyses and molecular studies. Livest. Sci., 229: 114–117. Search in Google Scholar

Guo S., Thompson E.A. (1992). Performing the exact test of Hardy–Weinberg proportion for multiple alleles. Biometrics, 48: 361–372. Search in Google Scholar

Halverson J.L., Basten C. (2005). Forensic DNA identification of animal-derived trace evidence: tools for linking victims and suspects. Croat. Med. J., 46: 598–605. Search in Google Scholar

Kanthaswamy S., Tom B.K., Mattila A.M., Johnston E., Dayton M., Kinaga J., Erickson B.J., Halverson J., Fantin D., DeNise S., Kou A., Malladi V., Satkoski J., Budowle B., Smith D.G., Koskinen M.T. (2009). Canine population data generated from a multiplex STR kit for use in forensic casework. J. Forensic Sci., 54: 829–840. Search in Google Scholar

Kanthaswamy S., Oldt R.F., Montes M., Falak A. (2018). Comparing two commercial domestic dog (Canis familiaris) STR genotyping kits for forensic identity calculations in a mixed-breed dog population sample. Anim. Gen., 50: 105–111. Search in Google Scholar

Kimberly A.H. (1998). Statistical analysis of STR data. Promega Corporation Profiles in DNA, 3: 14–15. Search in Google Scholar

Přibáňová M., Horák P., Schröffelová D., Urban T., Bechyňová R., Musilová L. (2009). Analysis of genetic variability in the Czech Dachshund population using microsatellite markers. J. Anim. Breed. Genet., 126: 311–318. Search in Google Scholar

Radko A., Rubiś D., Szumiec A. (2018). Analysis of microsatellite DNA polymorphism in the Tatra Shepherd Dog. J. App. Anim. Res., 46: 254–256. Search in Google Scholar

Tsuji A., Ishiko A., Kimura H., Nurimoto M., Kudo K., Ikeda N. (2008). Unusual death of a baby: a dog attack and confirmation using human and canine STRs. Int. J. Legal Med., 122: 59–62. Search in Google Scholar

Waits L.P., Luikart G., Taberlet P. (2001). Estimating the probability of identity among geno-types in natural populations: Cautions and guidelines. Mol. Ecol., 10: 249–256. Search in Google Scholar

Wright S. (1978). Evolution and the genetics of populations, variability within and among natural populations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA, vol. 4. Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo