Advertisement

Comparison of Different Methods for the Calculation of Indices of Paternity

  • R. Fimmers
  • P. M. Schneider
  • M. P. Baur
Part of the Advances in Forensic Haemogenetics book series (HAEMOGENETICS, volume 4)

Abstract

The qualitative decision about paternity in trio cases on the basis of DNA multilocus profiles is no problem. If there are more than 1 or 2 exclusion patterns (band present in child, which is neither present in mother or alleged father), the putative father has to be excluded. The problems arise, if, in the case of a non exclusion, one wants to quantify the evidence for paternity. Different statistics have been proposed for this purpose. This paper discusses three of these statistics and demonstrates their application to real data.

Keywords

Hand Position Transmission Probability Adjacent Lane Band Sharing Putative Father 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Evett IW, Werrett DJ, Buckleton JS (1989) Paternity calculation from DNA multilocusprofiles. J Forens Sci Soc 29: 249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Fimmers R, Epplen JT, Schneider PM, Baur MP (1989) Likelihood calculation in paternitytesting on the basis of DNA fingerprints. In: Polesky HF, Mayr WR (eds) Advances in forensic haemogenetics 3. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 14–16Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Fimmers R, Henke L, Henke J, Baur MP (1991) How to Deal with Mutations in DNA-Testing. This volumeGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Honma M, Ishiyama I (1989) Probability of paternity in paternity testing using the DNA fingerprint procedure. Hum Hered 39: 165–169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Honma M, Ishiyama I (1990) Application of DNA fingerprinting to parentage and extended family relationship testing. Hum Hered 40: 356–362PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Hummel K, Fukshanski N (1990) Biostatistical approaches using minisatelite DNA patterns in paternity cases (mother-child-putative father trios). In: Polesky HF, Mayr WR (eds) Advances in forensic haemogenetics 3. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 17–19Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Hummel K (1991) Biostatistische Auswertung von DNA-Bandenmustern in Fallen strittiger ldentität und Blutsverwandtschaft. Klin Lab 37: 252–258Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Jeffreys AJ, Turner M, De benham P (1991) The efficiency of multilocus DNA fingerprint probes for individualization and establishment of family relationships, determined from extensive casework. Am J Hum Genet 39: 11–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Schneider PM, Fimmers R, Bertrams J, Birkner P, Braunbeck K, Bulnheim U, Feuerbach M, Henke L, I ten E, Osterhaus E, Prinz M, Simeoni E, Rittner C (1991) Biostatistical basis of individualization and segregation analysis using the multilocus DNA probe MZ 1.3: Results of a collaborative study. (submitted for publication)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Fimmers
    • 1
  • P. M. Schneider
    • 2
  • M. P. Baur
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Medical StatisticsUniversity of BonnGermany
  2. 2.Institut für RechtsmedizinUniversität MainzGermany

Personalised recommendations