A tale of two PG systems: A comparison of the two most widely used continuous probabilistic genotyping systems in the United States

Abstract

AbstractThe development of probabilistic genotyping (PG) systems to quantitatively analyze DNA mixture samples has been transformative in forensic science. TrueAllele® Casework (TA) and STRmix™ (STRmix) are the two most widely used PG systems in the United States. The two systems were challenged with 48 two‐, three‐, and four‐person mock casework samples, for a total of 152 likelihood ratio (LR) comparisons. TA and STRmix converged on the same result (supportive, non‐supportive, or inconclusive) for ~91% of contributor‐specific comparisons. Where moderate or substantial differences in log(LR) values were observed, 9% affected the conclusion of the reference association to the mixture. The PG systems exhibited high correlations for estimated contributor‐specific template quantities (~92%) and log(LR)s produced (>88%). When the log(LR)s for only low‐template contributors (<100 pg) were compared, the R2 value dropped to ~68% and the difference became statistically significant. Of the 14 contributor comparisons where the conclusion differed, two were contradictory (supportive vs. non‐supportive) and 12 were either inconclusive versus non‐supportive or inconclusive versus supportive. The differing results were likely due to dissimilarities in the mixture input file as STRmix uses a lab‐defined analytical threshold (AT) and TA models to 10 RFUs for each electropherogram. When 7 of the 14 mixtures were reanalyzed by STRmix using a 10 RFU AT, the log(LR)s for the low‐template contributors became more similar to TAs. This study shows that while both systems may produce accurate and calibrated LRs, their results can deviate, especially for low‐template, degraded contributors, and the deviation is generally predictable.