Dog attack: the application of canine DNA profiling in forensic casework

Clarke, Melanie; Vandenberg, Nicholas

doi:10.1007/s12024-009-9114-8

Cited by 25 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After rapid exclusion of a mustelidae source DNA (suspected badger), the decision was made to further discriminate the canidae source DNA due to the legal implications of the case: if a dog's DNA would have been detected, then prosecution of the dog owner might have been the consequence after assuring the dog's identity by a standardized individualizing analysis [9,10]. A family screening prior to species determination also seems reasonable whenever there is a limited amount of sample DNA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bite through the tent

Naue

Lutz-Bonengel

Pietsch³

et al. 2012

Int J Legal Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors report on a young boy who was bitten into his face by an unknown animal while being asleep in a tent. Given the bite marks and the location of the scene, members of the mustelidae and canidae families were the first "suspects." Deoxyribunucleic acid (DNA) recovered from the tent's wall was analyzed with regard to parts of the mitochondrial 12S ribosomal ribunucleic acid (12S rRNA) and cytochrome b (cytb) genes as well as nuclear short tandem repeats (STRs). Since Sanger sequencing revealed a mixed sequence with a strong human component overlying the nonhuman contributor, an animal screening using a duplex real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with an intercalating dye and melt curve analysis was employed. The results were later confirmed by cloning. The applied commercial canine STR kit verified the animal family (canidae) but did not help in discriminating the species due to cross-species amplification. In the presented case, the real-time PCR assay offered the cheapest and fastest method for animal family determination, which then allowed for an appropriate and sample-saving strategy to characterize the causative animal species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bite through the tent

Naue

Lutz-Bonengel

Pietsch³

et al. 2012

Int J Legal Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…). This capability is also necessary in cases for which a dog is not the aggressor but when canine evidence—such as hair, feces, or blood—is uncovered in a criminal or civil investigation involving humans (Clarke & Vandenberg ; Amorim & Budowle ). Before the discovery and widespread use of short tandem repeat (STR) markers in forensic identity testing, information obtained from canine samples was limited to species designation or, at best, breed assignment (Peabody et al .…”

Section: Population Genetic Estimates For Each Panel's Markers Includmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the efficacy of these STR markers has been demonstrated both in research and in casework (DeNise et al . ; Halverson & Basten ; Clarke & Vandenberg ), there is an absence of comparative studies between different canine forensic identification kits.…”

Section: Population Genetic Estimates For Each Panel's Markers Includmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing two commercial domestic dog (Canis familiaris) STR genotyping kits for forensic identity calculations in a mixed‐breed dog population sample

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Almost half of all US households own a dog (Canis familiaris). Though these household pets can attack humans and other animals, they are also frequently victims of cruelty, neglect and theft. In human-oriented investigations, the tendency of domestic dogs to leave behind physical traces (such as hair) can serve as valuable links between crime scenes and suspects/victims. This demonstrated utility of canine biological evidence has created demand for genotyping marker sets for canine forensic genetic testing. Through research and casework, short tandem repeat (STR) panels have been shown to be very efficient for identity and parentage testing in dogs. However, there is an absence of comparative studies between different canine forensic identification kits. The Thermo Fisher Scientific Canine Genotypes TM Panel 1.1 and 2.1 Kits were originally designed and developed for routine and forensic use respectively, although both kits can be used for either purpose. In this study, we evaluated both STR panels to determine how critical forensic genetic metrics are affected by panel-to-panel variation in marker composition and design. Our results show that although STR panel composition can influence estimates such as inbreeding, combined power of discrimination and combined probability of exclusion, greater average allele number values exhibited across all markers in Panel 2.1 facilitated significantly more precise estimates of random match probability (RMP) and combined probability of identity. Furthermore, we demonstrate that a theta (h) correction of 0.09 can be used to conservatively adjust RMPs generated from a small reference database of fewer than 50 samples, confirming that Panel 2.1 is a more robust forensic genotyping system than is Panel 1.1. for domestic dogs. We also demonstrate that opportunistic local sampling of fewer than 50 mixed-breed dogs can produce sufficient discriminatory and exclusionary power with either genotyping kit.

show abstract

“…; Halverson & Basten ; Shen & DuLaney ; Kanthaswamy ; Ogden et al . , ; Attoh ; Clarke & Vandenberg ; American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals ; Bond ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review: domestic animal forensic genetics – biological evidence, genetic markers, analytical approaches and challenges

Kanthaswamy

2015

Animal Genetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review highlights the importance of domestic animal genetic evidence sources, genetic testing, markers and analytical approaches as well as the challenges this field is facing in view of the de facto 'gold standard' human DNA identification. Because of the genetic similarity between humans and domestic animals, genetic analysis of domestic animal hair, saliva, urine, blood and other biological material has generated vital investigative leads that have been admitted into a variety of court proceedings, including criminal and civil litigation. Information on validated short tandem repeat, single nucleotide polymorphism and mitochondrial DNA markers and public access to genetic databases for forensic DNA analysis is becoming readily available. Although the fundamental aspects of animal forensic genetic testing may be reliable and acceptable, animal forensic testing still lacks the standardized testing protocols that human genetic profiling requires, probably because of the absence of monetary support from government agencies and the difficulty in promoting cooperation among competing laboratories. Moreover, there is a lack in consensus about how to best present the results and expert opinion to comply with court standards and bear judicial scrutiny. This has been the single most persistent challenge ever since the earliest use of domestic animal forensic genetic testing in a criminal case in the mid-1990s. Crime laboratory accreditation ensures that genetic test results have the courts' confidence. Because accreditation requires significant commitments of effort, time and resources, the vast majority of animal forensic genetic laboratories are not accredited nor are their analysts certified forensic examiners. The relevance of domestic animal forensic genetics in the criminal justice system is undeniable. However, further improvements are needed in a wide range of supporting resources, including standardized quality assurance and control protocols for sample handling, evidence testing, statistical analysis and reporting that meet the rules of scientific acceptance, reliability and human forensic identification standards.

show abstract

Dog attack: the application of canine DNA profiling in forensic casework

Cited by 25 publications

References 15 publications

Bite through the tent

Bite through the tent

Comparing two commercial domestic dog (Canis familiaris) STR genotyping kits for forensic identity calculations in a mixed‐breed dog population sample

Review: domestic animal forensic genetics – biological evidence, genetic markers, analytical approaches and challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About