Forensic Science International 119 (2001) 225231

A brief history of the formation of DNA databases in forensic science within Europe
Peter D. Martina,*, Hermann Schmitterb, Peter M. Schneiderc
32 Oakeld Gardens, Kent, BR3 3AZ Beckenham, UK Serology Department, Bundeskriminalamt, Thaerstr. 11, 65193 Wiesbaden, Germany c Institute of Legal Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University, Am Pulverturm 3, 55131 Mainz, Germany
b a

Received 10 September 2000; accepted 14 November 2000

Abstract The introduction of DNA analysis to forensic science brought with it a number of choices for analysis, not all of which were compatible. As laboratories throughout Europe were eager to use the new technology different systems became routine in different laboratories and consequently, there was no basis for the exchange of results. A period of co-operation then started in which a nucleus of forensic scientists agreed on an uniform system. This collaboration spread to incorporate most of the established forensic science laboratories in Europe and continued through two major changes in the technology. At each step agreement was reached on which systems to use. From the beginning it was realised that DNA databases would provide the criminal justice systems with an efcient way of crime solving and consequently some local databases were created. It was not until the introduction of the amplication technology linked to the analysis of short tandem repeats that a sufciently sensitive and robust system was available for the formation of efcient and effective DNA databases. Comprehensive legislation enacted in the UK in 1995 enabled forensic scientists to set up the rst national DNA database which would hold both personal DNA proles together with results obtained from crime scenes. Other countries quickly followed but in some the legislation has severely restricted the amount and type of data which can be retained and, therefore, effectiveness of the databases is limited. The widespread use of commercially produced multiplex kits has produced a situation in which nearly all European laboratories are using compatible systems and there is, therefore, the potential for the introduction of a panEuropean DNA database. However, the exchange of results between countries is hampered by the various legislations which currently exist. # 2001 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Restriction fragment length polymorphism; Genetic ngerprint; Single locus probing

1. Origins Before the use of molecular biology in forensic science became a reality, a set of blood group markers (red cell antigens together with enzyme and serum protein polymorphisms) were used to identify victims and suspects in crime cases. At that time, the practitioners in forensic science laboratories throughout Europe and North America were all known to each other through conferences, visits etc.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 44-20-82-89-3673. E-mail addresses: pdmartin@mcmail.com (P.D. Martin), hermann.schmitter@t-online.de (H. Schmitter), pschneid@mail.unimainz.de (P.M. Schneider).

and enjoyed a healthy level of co-operation and uniformity of methodologies. DNA analysis in forensic science had been suggested in the early 1980's using restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) determination by hybridisation to specic probes following DNA digestion with restriction endonucleases [1,2]. Although the systems used demonstrated the ability to determine greater variability at the chosen loci than had previously been possible with traditional blood group analysis, there did not appear to be the potential for approaching individuality. There was great enthusiasm amongst the forensic science community for the momentous discovery of the minisatellite approach to individualisation [3], which was pioneered by

0379-0738/01/$ see front matter # 2001 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 3 7 9 - 0 7 3 8 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 4 3 6 - 9

226

P.D. Martin et al. / Forensic Science International 119 (2001) 225231

Prof. Alec Jeffreys in the middle 1980's. Jeffreys proposed the use of two probes, called multilocus probes (MLP) which identied repeating sequences in an enzymic digest of a total DNA extract by southern blot analysis, to produce a `genetic ngerprint'. Using low stringency conditions the radiolabelled probes hybridised with a series of tandemly repeated sequences with a size range greater than 20 kb. The resulting autoradiographs consisted of a ladder-like series of bands similar to a bar-code. Below the 4 kb level, the density of bands was such that reliable comparisons could not be made and, in practice, only those bands between 4 and 20 kb were used for the analyses. The forensic science community expected that all of the major laboratories would soon be procient in the use of this new technology for crime investigation [4] but a number of problems were encountered. The method required relatively large amounts of high molecular weight DNA to be extracted from crime scene samples. Also, as the size of each band could not be reliably assessed, it became apparent that suspect and control samples had to be analysed in the same electrophoresis gel as inter-plate comparisons could be difcult. Recording the results proved problematic as conversion to a numerical form was not possible. The introduction of this technology brought with it a new set of conditions, those of patent rights and licensing agreements. The application had been exploited by a commercial company (ICI) who had acquired the rights to the use of the new technology and forensic science laboratories, who were mainly state funded, envisaged many difculties with obtaining the necessary nance. As a consequence, a certain amount of rancour developed, and scientists tried to nd ways of circumventing royalty payments. The most common way was to develop new probes and this was used with varying degrees of success [5,6]. In the event, many laboratories for a variety of reasons did not successfully adopt the MLP system. The method was found to be demanding and the results were not suited to the formation of computer databases. It was not until the advent of single locus probing (SLP) that the technology was really progressed, initially by ICI and then by the mainstream forensic science organisations. In the SLP system probes were isolated which identied repeat sequences in individual minisatellites using high stringency conditions to produce a maximum of two bands per probe [7]. Although the targeted minisatellites showed considerable variation in their repeat numbers, a single locus was not sufcient for individualisation. Consequently, a number of these loci were sequentially analysed to obtain a composite result. During the electrophoretic separation, a control ladder of known molecular size fragments could be used in order to obtain an estimate of the size of the minisatellite bands. As a consequence, the results could be recorded as a numerical set making comparisons much easier. Later developments showed the use of automated scanners to produce objective results. By the time that SLP analysis became routine, the licensing agreements were largely accepted, although somewhat

reluctantly, and many laboratories searched around to nd the cheapest options. Some scientists within Europe prepared their own probes and many others were described in the scientic literature [8]. The whole situation developed into one in which there was a considerable choice of restriction enzymes with a multitude of probes available for selection. 2. European co-operation During the 1980s, the EU had stated their intention to relax the border restrictions between member countries, a situation that could offer greater opportunity for crossborder crimes. It also occurred to forensic scientists that unless each laboratory was using the same restriction enzyme and some common probes, there would be no possibility of exchanging results. So, in 1988, scientists from the major European forensic science laboratories who had started work on single locus probing (these scientists were all known to each other from their work with blood grouping) together with some representatives from commercial companies, met to discuss a way for harmonisation of the technology throughout Europe. It took two more meetings as well as a series of collaborative exercises [9,10] to settle on some concrete proposals, whereby, a method involving a specic enzyme (Hinf1) and two probes (MS43a and YNH24) were agreed as a core package that would be used by all participating laboratories. Compromises had to be made because a number of the laboratories wished to do paternity testing as well as crime case analysis and some of the probes were not suitable for both. Nonetheless, this was a big step forward and, although the members (who had christened themselves the European DNA proling (EDNAP) group) met on a regular basis, the alliance remained informal until it became a Working Group of the International Society for Forensic Haemogenetics in 1991. EDNAP's main aim was to investigate systems of DNA proling which could be used for harmonisation and this would be achieved through inter-laboratory exercises. A decision was also taken that the results of all inter-laboratory exercises would be published in the scientic literature. The membership was deliberately kept to a minimum in order to facilitate ease of decision making and even though all western European countries were eventually represented not all laboratories could be accommodated. The choice of which laboratories should represent the various countries caused some friction that has lasted until the present time. The results from single locus probing could be stored as simple numerical data and as soon as the new technology became a routine operation, the Metropolitan Police Forensic Science Laboratory (MPFSL) in London developed a computer searchable database which would hold the proles obtained from all crime scenes and personal proles from those convicted of serious crimes [11]. From the outset, this proved to be a success particularly in establishing links

P.D. Martin et al. / Forensic Science International 119 (2001) 225231

227

between different crime scenes. As time progressed and most major laboratories settled on the use of the same probes, the potential for forming linked databases throughout the UK was such that the Met Police Commissioner, Sir Peter Imbert, went on television to make the case for the formation of a national DNA database, and to address public concerns about possible violations of privacy rights. In a limited way such a database was introduced with the Home Ofce Forensic Science Service Laboratories and the MPFSL exchanging information from the various databases that had been established in the different laboratories. However, during the time that single locus probing was the major DNA technology used in forensic science throughout Europe, there was by no means total harmonisation. The way in which forensic science services were delivered to the criminal justice systems within Europe were extremely varied. While the majority of work was carried out in government or police laboratories there were many medico-legal institutes, university departments and private laboratories who also had a share of the market. A number of these organisations had elected to use a different restriction enzyme and a separate package of probes, the results from which would not allow compatibility. 3. PCR technology In the early 1990s, the technology took a dramatic change with the universal interest focused on the use of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique that enabled the scientist to amplify template material from minimal amounts of extracted DNA [12]. The method was fast, reliable and extremely sensitive and offered the chance to detect small repeating sequences that would be potentially more useful than the previously used MLP and SLP systems. Once again there was a considerable choice and harmonisation was once again threatened. The FBI Laboratory in USA was developing AMFLP (amplied fragment length polymorphisms) systems such as D1S80 and Apo B [13,14] that were smaller versions of SLP minisatellites and some of these were adopted by laboratories in Europe and used with varying degrees of success. The USA continued with the use of AMFLPs and they became the routine methodology in many of their laboratories. Commercial companies had also started to produce kits for the recognition of markers that involved the use of PCR. Notably amongst these was the detection of a sequence polymorphism within the HLA DQa locus [15]. In terms of individualisation, this was a relatively uninformative locus but it allowed the scientists to become acquainted with the technology in operational conditions. It is interesting to note that the use of this system was in contravention of a set of proposals issued by a commission of the European Council on the use of DNA in forensic science [16]. The commission had proposed that markers derived from coding regions of the genome should not be used. In 1991, a novel method emerged which employed elements of PCR technology and SLP methods to detect

differences in the internal variation of minisatellites [17]. While studying the evolutionary mechanism of the minisatellites, Jeffreys found differences between the repeating sequences within a single minisatellite. In particular, the MS32 locus showed considerable variation that could be detected via a sequencing gel following amplication. The pattern of bands produced could be converted to a numerical code and the overall result obtained from the two alleles approached individualisation. The technology was termed digital DNA typing or minisatellite variant repeat PCR (MVR-PCR) and had the potential to provide results which could be used for databasing. Unfortunately, the method proved to be complicated and demanding and, in the initial trials within Europe, few operators were able to achieve successful results. There was also considerable concern regarding analyses which involved the interpretation of patterns derived from mixtures of template material. Consequently the technology did not receive the enthusiasm which it deserved and scientists concentrated on other methods which appeared more straightforward. In 1992, there was unanimous agreement amongst the members of EDNAP that the way forward lay with the use of a new compatible form of genetic proling called short tandem repeats (STRs) [18,19]. These consisted of microsatellites of small repeating units, typically three, four or ve bases, with a maximum length of around 300 bases. Due to the small size, it had been demonstrated that they were extremely stable and could be reliably determined from old and degraded samples. It appeared that there was a general consensus throughout Europe that STRs would form the basis of future work. Once again, through a series of interlaboratory exercises [20,21], EDNAP achieved an agreement amongst members that the two STR loci, THO1 and VWA, would be used by all participating laboratories [22]. This might appear to be a fairly meagre agreement but it must be realised that there were so many different loci in regular use at the time that it was important to establish a starting position. In 1998, when STR analysis had become an established feature of forensic science in Europe, an Interpol initiative, associated with the sexual abuse of children, required a register of sexual offenders that would contain DNA information. The following loci were agreed: THO1, VWA, FGA and D21S11 [23]. All four loci were in general use throughout Europe and had been successfully tested in inter-laboratory exercises. They could be reliably multiplexed and became known as the European standard set of loci (ESS). One year later, the set of STR loci for the Interpol register was expanded to include three more: D3S1358, D8S1179 and D18S51. 4. Multiplexes The preferred system for STR genetic typing was via uorescent dye labelled primers and automated DNA

228

P.D. Martin et al. / Forensic Science International 119 (2001) 225231

sequencers. This allowed for simultaneous amplication and separation of a number of STR loci in a single analytical procedure. The Forensic Science Service (FSS) in the UK had been working on a multiplex of four loci for routine use as well as databasing, and this was used operationally for a short time and tested by a number of laboratories in Europe. With new legislation being enacted to provide for a national DNA database in the UK (England and Wales) in which anyone convicted of a recordable crime could be required to provide a sample for DNA proling, the FSS expanded the number of loci in the multiplex to allow for greater discrimination between individuals. After a couple of false starts, the outcome was six autosomal STR loci and another locus for sex determination that was termed the second generation multiplex (SGM) [24]. In the meantime, the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) had been formed, mainly by police laboratories and laboratories providing forensic services for the police authorities as forum to address issues of quality and standards across the complete range of disciplines within forensic science. The FSS was chosen to chair the DNA section and invited representatives from all government and police laboratories within Europe to attend meetings. This group had considerable success in training and raising the standard of work and the use of the SGM was popular amongst many of the members. In order to avoid overlapping responsibilities, ENFSI continued to deal with quality and issues associated with standards and EDNAP concentrated on looking at future developments in a broader range of DNA proling topics. With EDNAP retaining a small membership and ENFSI dealing only with state organisations, there was a danger that the university laboratories, medico-legal institutes and private concerns would be left stranded. However, with the increase in the number of laboratories involved in quality assurance groups, in which a limited number of laboratories would participate in QA exercises, and the large membership of ENFSI, it appears that the vast majority of organisations now have easy access to the necessary information. The situation might become more difcult due to an increase in membership applications from laboratories in eastern Europe. These laboratories, however, will have to be accommodated in order to achieve a common standard and a high level of quality in forensic DNA proling throughout the entire Europe. Due to the success of the FSS multiplex commercial companies expressed an interest in the production of kits that would be available as off-the-shelf products. This is a very attractive concept to forensic scientists as it alleviates the problems of production and maintenance of reagents within the laboratory and removes the complexities of licensing agreements. There is, of course, a price to pay, as the kits are expensive. There are several multiplexes available now on the market covering between 10 and 15 autosomal STR systems as well as the sex-specic amelogenin locus. Although these multiplexes have been initially developed

to address the system requirements of the CODIS database in US (see below), all European core systems are now integrated as well. The use of these kits is rapidly spreading within Europe as well as the US and it now seems likely that it will become the accepted standard methodology. Thus, it appears that we have come full circle from the time when all European laboratories were using the same blood group markers to a situation in which almost all laboratories are using the same set of DNA loci. There is now a considerable overlap with the systems used in the US which would even allow the transatlantic exchange of data, thus, representing a complete change of situation compared to the period of SLP analysis in the early 1990s. 5. Databases The rst of the national DNA databases involving STR data was formed in the UK in 1995 and in the rst 5 years, it has demonstrated how effective such a venture can be in the detection of the perpetrators of crimes. By the end of 1999, the database had entries of personal proles totalling well over 700,000 and it is, therefore, not surprising that there were around 700 matches achieved each week. Such an enterprise requires a massive investment in both staff and equipment but it has the potential to be cost effective in the amount of investigative time that can be saved. By 1998, three other European countries (Austria, Germany and The Netherlands) had successfully introduced national DNA databases [25]. Due to the limitations imposed by the various legal systems these databases were not as comprehensive as that in the UK and, therefore, will not hold the same level of personal proles. The STR loci used to form these databases were: UK The Netherlands Austria Germany THO1, VWA, FGA, D18S51, D21S11 THO1, VWA, FGA, D18S51, D21S11 THO1, VWA, FGA, D18S51, D21S11 THO1, VWA, FGA, D8S1179, D8S1179, D8S1179, SE33, D21S11

Even though the German set of loci did not contain the complete SGM, there was sufcient overlap for the exchange of results. In all cases there was a requirement to obtain another sample for analysis should a match be determined. The second analysis would be conrmed with another set of loci. By the end of 1999, the UK was routinely using the SGM plus kit (PE Biosystems) for the analysis of all samples to be entered onto the database. It is predicted that all other European databases will be upgraded to contain at least the seven Interpol loci, or even all the loci present in this commercial kit. Finland and Norway have introduced a national database in 1999 with the Finnish database being most advanced

P.D. Martin et al. / Forensic Science International 119 (2001) 225231

229

regarding the number of records entered. Belgium, Denmark, and Switzerland will follow in 2000 with legislation proposed but not yet enacted. In France, legislation has already been enacted but the operational details for the database have to be dened. Sweden has already a database of unknown crime samples but needs to work out the details for an offender database. To date preparations to introduce national databases are underway in Italy and Spain as well as some east European countries [26]. The extent of the legislation is not entirely clear and, therefore, the future effectiveness of the databases cannot be assessed at this stage. Also, decisions have yet to be made on which loci will be used but it is condently expected that at least the European core system will be used. Now that some databases are a reality and others will soon be in place, if legislation allows, there is the possibility to exchange results between the various European countries. In these circumstances quality issues become important. Maintenance and security of the stored information becomes of paramount importance and local legislation must be observed in all details. Systems must be in place to ensure that the data is correct and that a personal prole is removed if the person is acquitted of the crime or if no further action is taken. It is inevitable that in the early stages of database operations, there will not be any dramatic successes; these will only come when there is sufcient data for matches to be made. In this context, it is interesting to note that in 1989, the FBI proposed a national DNA database for North America that would hold proles from SLP analyses. Even at that time it was appreciated that at some time in the future it would be necessary to include proles obtained by the PCR technology. The database was termed the combined DNA index system (CODIS) and has developed over the years to include crime scene data and personal proles which originate from SLP, AMFLP and STR systems. The database has the capability to search combinations of results from all technologies and is recognised as having an efcient and effective mechanism. While the methodology for producing results has to be standardised and quality issues must be observed, the submitting authorities retain control of their information, the database exists only as a central pool for comparison purposes. It appears that this concept is attractive to some criminal justice systems in Europe and there has been considerable interest in the acquisition of the CODIS system, especially by Scandinavian and eastern European countries. 6. Ethical and legal issues The forensic scientists within Europe have long seen the advantages of DNA databases and through good discussion and a good deal of compromise, a level of harmonisation has been reached which would allow for the exchange of information. Networked databases would make it much easier to identify criminals who are responsible for crimes

in other countries but the different criminal justice systems that currently exist are unlikely to make this a reality in the near future. For a variety of historical and political reasons, civil rights and human dignity issues are viewed differently within the separate countries. In the UK, the 1995 Criminal Justice Act allowed police to take non-intimate samples for DNA analysis from anyone suspected of committing a recordable offence (in general terms this means a crime which could attract a custodial sentence). If the person is found guilty, the DNA prole can stay on the database forever and, furthermore, should new technology become available the sample can be re-tested using the new system. If the person is acquitted, however, the result must be removed from the database. In other European countries more restrictive legislation is envisaged, whereby, personal proles can only be entered onto a database if the individual is convicted of a serious offence. In France, the intention is to only hold proles from convicted sex offenders. The reasoning behind the UK decision came from statistics which showed that the vast majority of men found guilty of sexual assaults had previous convictions for more minor crimes. Thus, a person who sets out to be a serial rapist could be denied his ambition because he would be identied from the database after the rst assault. In Germany, the samples for analysis are provided anonymously to the laboratories, whereas the resulting DNA proles are entered, together with a name, onto the police database. While this has the advantage of preventing misuse of the DNA sample it provides a very cumbersome system for the scientist to operate. In other jurisdictions there are legal decisions that will, unwittingly, make the databases less effective. In The Netherlands, a sample for DNA processing can only be taken if it helps to prove the case. Therefore, if a suspect admits a sexual offence, no sample is taken and no personal prole is entered onto the database. Furthermore, in Germany, The Netherlands, Norway and Belgium it is not possible to retain a blood or saliva sample from the offenders, the samples have to be destroyed after the DNA prole has been obtained. Thus, it is not possible to reanalyse a suspect's sample before a database match is being reported to the police, or to update the database records to extend the existing DNA records for additional loci. The reason for this requirement is based on concerns about the protection of privacy rights. By destroying the sample, any DNA analyses exceeding the purpose of forensic identication shall be prevented. In contrast, reference samples are being stored routinely in Austria, Finland, UK and Switzerland. While it is true that there has been some debate concerning the storage of genetic proles which might, in the future, provide more information than was previously thought, the whole subject of storing DNA results has become emotive. Legislation for security of the data could be enacted to prevent any unauthorised agencies from obtaining the information. Wide-ranging ngerprint databases have been in use around the world for a long time and fears about their misuse are generally unfounded.

230

P.D. Martin et al. / Forensic Science International 119 (2001) 225231 [5] G. Vassart, M. Georges, R. Monsieur, H. Brocas, A.S. Lequarre, D. Christophe, A sequence in M13 phage detects hypervariable minisatellites in human and animal DNA, Science 235 (1987) 683684. [6] U. Schacker, P.M. Schneider, B. Holtkamp, E. Bohnke, R. Fimmers, H.H. Sonneborn, C. Rittner, Isolation of the DNA minisatellite probe MZ 1.3 and its application to DNA ngerprinting analysis, Forensic Sci. Int. 44 (1990) 209224. [7] Z. Wong, V. Wilson, I. Patel, S. Povey, A.J. Jeffreys, Characterization of a panel of highly variable minisatellites cloned from human DNA, Ann. Hum. Genet. 51 (1987) 269288. [8] Y. Nakamura, M. Leppert, P. O'Connel, R. Wolff, T. Holm, M. Culver, C. Martin, E. Fujimoto, M. Hoff, E. Kumlin, R. White, Variable number of tandem repeats (VNTR) markers for human gene mapping, Science 235 (1987) 16161622. [9] P.M. Schneider, R. Fimmers, S. Woodroffe, D.J. Werrett, W. Bar, B. Brinkmann, B. Eriksen, S. Jones, A.D. Kloosterman, B. Mevag, V.L. Pascali, C. Rittner, H. Schmitter, J.A. Thomson, P. Gill, Report of a European collaborative exercise comparing DNA typing results using a single locus VNTR probe, Forensic Sci. Int. 49 (1991) 115. [10] P. Gill, S. Woodroffe, W. Bar, B. Brinkmann, A. Carracedo, B. Eriksen, S. Jones, A.D. Kloosterman, B. Ludes, B. Mevag, V.L. Pascali, M. Rudler, H. Schmitter, P.M. Schneider, J.A. Thomson, A report of an international collaborative experiment to demonstrate the uniformity obtainable using DNA proling techniques, Forensic Sci. Int. 53 (1992) 29 43. [11] M. Greenhalgh, J. Allard, Experiences with a computerised database of DNA proles in forensic casework, in: C. Rittner, P.M. Schneider (Eds.), Advances in Forensic Haemogenetics, Vol. 4, Springer, Berlin, 1991, pp. 298300. [12] R.K. Saiki, T.L. Bugawan, G.T. Horn, K.B. Mullis, H.A. Erlich, Analysis of enzymatically amplied a-globin and HLA-DQa DNA with allele-specic oligonucleotide probes, Nature 324 (1986) 163166. [13] K. Kasai, Y. Nakamura, R. White, Amplication of a variable number of tandem repeats (VNTR) locus (pMCT118) by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and its application to forensic science, J. Forensic Sci. 35 (1990) 11961200. [14] E. Boerwinkle, W. Xiong, E. Fourest, L. Chan, Rapid typing of tandemly repeated hypervariable loci by the polymerase chain reaction: application to the apolipoprotein B 30 hypervariable region, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 86 (1989) 212216. [15] R. Helmuth, N. Fildes, E. Blake, M.C. Luce, J. Chimera, R. Madej, HLA-DQa allele and genotype frequencies in various human populations, determined by using enzymatic amplication and oligonucleotide probes, Am. J. Hum. Genet. 47 (1990) 515523. [16] Council of Europe, Recommendation on the use of analysis of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) within the framework of the criminal justice system, prepared by the ad hoc committee of experts on bioethics (CAHBI), 1991, no. R (92) 1. [17] A.J. Jeffreys, A. MacLeod, K. Tamaki, D.L. Neil, D.G. Monckton, Minisatellite repeat coding as a digital approach to DNA typing, Nature 354 (1991) 204209. [18] J.L. Weber, P.E. May, Abundant class of human DNA polymorphisms which can be typed using the polymerase chain reaction, Am. J. Hum. Genet. 44 (1989) 388396.

All of these issues were debated at a European meeting in Germany in 1996 [27] where it was generally agreed by scientists that use of comprehensive DNA databases can be extremely effective in linking scenes of crime and identifying the perpetrators of a wide spectrum of cases. Forensic scientists have been successful with the integration of DNA systems throughout Europe and it is now the turn of the legislators to provide a harmonised framework of criminal justice in which to operate. 7. Footnote While the major emphasis has been placed on development of systems for detecting markers in genomic DNA, there has also been a considerable effort expended on methods for typing sequences within the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). Although these results are not as discriminating as those of the STRs, they can nonetheless be invaluable to investigators in cases where skeletal remains, hair etc. are the only samples available. There have also been advances in the use of markers which are male-specic (Ychromosome) and these have been used successfully particularly in cases of sexual assault. It is difcult to predict where the technology will go in the future. While there is much research based on miniaturised systems, there might be an incompatibility with those systems in current use. There is, therefore, the danger of invalidating current databases unless an inexpensive way can be found to re-examine samples which have already been assayed which, however, would only be possible in those countries where the storage of a reference sample is allowed. However, if cheaper, faster and more discriminating systems do emerge there will be a considerable incentive to make them operational. Acknowledgements This study was supported in part by the European Commission in the context of the STADNAP network (www.STADNAP.uni-mainz.de; contract SMT 97-7506). References
[1] A.J. Driesel, Genetisch determinierte Variabilitat von DNAsegmenten, in: Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of the Society for Forensic Haemogenetics, 1983, pp. 283 288. [2] M. Baird, E. Kanter, R. Shaler, I. Balazs, in: B. Brinkmann, K. Henningsen (Eds.), Advances in Forensic Haemogenetics, Vol. 1, Springer, Berlin, 1985, pp. 351355. [3] A.J. Jeffreys, V. Wilson, S.L. Thein, Individual-specic ngerprints of human DNA, Nature 316 (1985) 7679. [4] P. Gill, A.J. Jeffreys, D.J. Werrett, Forensic application of DNA ngerprints, Nature 318 (1985) 577579.

P.D. Martin et al. / Forensic Science International 119 (2001) 225231 [19] A. Edwards, A. Civitello, H.A. Hammond, C.T. Caskey, DNA typing and genetic mapping with trimeric and tetrameric tandem repeats, Am. J. Hum. Genet. 49 (1991) 746756. [20] P. Gill, C. Kimpton, E. D'Aloja, J.F. Andersen, W. Bar, B. Brinkmann, S. Holgerssen, V. Johnsson, A.D. Kloosterman, M.V. Lareu, L. Nellemann, H. Ptzinger, C.P. Phillips, H. Schmitter, P.M. Schneider, M. Stenersen, Report of the European DNA proling group (EDNAP)-towards standardization of short tandem repeat (STR) loci, Forensic Sci. Int. 65 (1994) 5159. [21] C. Kimpton, P. Gill, E. D'Aloja, J.F. Andersen, W. Bar, S. Holgerssen, S. Jacobsen, V. Johnsson, A.D. Kloosterman, M.V. Lareu, L. Nellemann, H. Ptzinger, C.P. Phillips, S. Rand, H. Schmitter, P.M. Schneider, M. Stenersen, M.C. Vide, Report on the second EDNAP collaborative STR exercise, Forensic Sci. Int. 71 (1995) 137152. [22] J. Andersen, P. Martin, A. Carracedo, M. Dobosz, B. Eriksen, V. Johnsson, C. Kimpton, A. Kloosterman, C. Konialis, A. Kratzer, P. Phillips, B. Mevag, H. Ptzinger, S. Rand, B. Rosen, H. Schmitter, P.M. Schneider, M. Vide, Report on the third EDNAP collaborative STR exercise, Forensic Sci. Int. 78 (1996) 8393.

231

[23] A. Leriche, D. Vanek, H. Schmitter, U. Schleenbecker, J. Woller, P. Montagna, L. Garofano, W. Sprangers, E. Wolf, N. Moe, J. Matusek, J.A. Heranz, A.M. Gambin Garcia-Rojo, L.S. Utrilla, W. Grahamslaw, P. Fifka, M. Branchower, Final report of the Interpol Working Party on DNA proling, in: Proceedings from the 2nd European Symposium on Human Identication, Promega Corporation, Madison, WI, USA, 1998, pp. 4854. [24] N.J. Oldroyd, A.J. Urquhart, C.P. Kimpton, E.S. Millican, S.K. Watson, T. Downes, P. Gill, A highly discriminative octoplex short tandem repeat polymerase chain reaction system suitable for human individual identication, Electrophoresis 6 (1995) 334337. [25] P.M. Schneider, DNA databases for offender identication in Europe-the need for technical, legal and political harmonization, in: Proceedings of the 2nd European Symposium on Human Identication, Promega Corporation, Madison, WI, USA, 1998, pp. 4044. [26] P.M. Schneider, P.D. Martin, Criminal DNA databases: the European situation, Forensic Sci. Int. FSI 3001. [27] P.M. Schneider, C. Rittner, P.D. Martin (Eds.), in: Proceedings of the European Symposium on Ethical and Legal Issues of DNA Typing in Forensic Medicine, Forensic Sci. Int. 88 (1997) 1110.