Comment on “DNA mixtures interpretation – A proof-of-concept multi-software comparison highlighting different probabilistic methods’ performances on challenging samples” by Alladio et al.

Duncan A. Taylor, John S. Buckleton, Jo-Anne Bright

    Research output: Contribution to journalLetterpeer-review

    Abstract

    Alladio et al. [1] recently published findings comparing the performance of semi-continuous probabilistic genotyping (PG) systems LRmix Studio and Lab Retriever, with the fully-continuous systems STRmix™, EuroForMix, and DNA VIEW. While there has been some work in this area [[2], [3], [4]] the breadth of samples tested and software compared have been limited. Alladio et al. fills a gap in the PG research landscape, which is the independent (in terms of software developers) comparison of the performance of such systems. This is one of the recommended actions for the field of DNA analysis by the PCAST report [5,6], specifically:

    “Under what circumstances - and why - does the method produce results (random inclusion probabilities) that differ substantially from those produced by other methods?”
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)e248-e251
    Number of pages4
    JournalForensic Science International: Genetics
    Volume40
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - May 2019

    Keywords

    • DNA analysis
    • PG Systems
    • probabilistic genotyping

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comment on “DNA mixtures interpretation – A proof-of-concept multi-software comparison highlighting different probabilistic methods’ performances on challenging samples” by Alladio et al.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this