Version	1.1	/	Date	of	Issue:	2.09.16 /	Issuing	Authority:	Forensic	Science	Standards	Board	(FSSB)

OSAC	RESEARCH	NEEDS	ASSESSMENT	FORM

Title	of	research	need: Validate	STR/SNP	panels	for	species	of	forensic	interest	using	the	OSAC	

DNA	Validation	Standards.

Keyword(s): STR	panel,	SNP	panel,	allelic	ladder,	standardization,	validation,	game	species,	

domestic	species,	livestock,	wildlife

Submitting	subcommittee(s): Wildlife	Forensics Date	Approved: 2/3/16

(If	SAC	review	identifies	additional	subcommittees,	add	them	to	the	box	above.)

Background	Information:

1. Description	of	research	need:

Once	a	standardized	panel	and	database	is	developed	for	a	species,	a	thorough	developmental	

validation	following	the	OSAC	Validation	Standards	is	necessary.		This	requires	coordination	between	

laboratories,	validated	reference	materials,	allelic	ladders	and	databases	be	developed.	

The	species	of	interest	for	validated	standardized	panels	are	common	game	species	such	as	North	

American	deer	species,	moose,	and	bear;	species	of		high	international	trade	value	(tigers,	sturgeon,	

elephants);	and	commonly	encountered	domestic	and	livestock	species	(dogs,	cats,	horses,	cattle).

2. Key	bibliographic	references	relating	to	this	research	need:

OSAC	DNA	Validation	Standards	(in	development	but	based	on	previously	published	validation	

standards)

Wictum E,	Kun	T,	Lindquist	C,	Malvick	J,	Vankan	D,	Sacks	B.	Developmental	validation	of	DogFiler,	a	

novel	multiplex	for	canine	DNA	profiling	in	forensic	casework.	Forensic	Sci	Int	Genet.	2013	Jan;	

7(1):82-91.

Linacre	A,	Gumao	L,	Hecht	W,	Hellmann	AP,	Mayr	WR,	Parson	W,	Prinz	M,	Schneider	PM,	Morling	N.	

ISFG:	Recommendations	regarding	the	use	of	non-human	(animal)	DNA	in	forensic	genetic	

investigations.	Forensic	Sci	Int	Genet.	2014	Jan;	8(1):	90-100.

Linacre	A,	Tobe	S.	Wildlife	DNA	Analysis:	Applications	in	Forensic	Science.	John	Wiley	&	Sons,	Ltd.,	

Chichester,	West	Sussex,	UK,	2013.

Huffman	JE	and	Wallace	JR,	editors.	Wildlife	Forensics:	Methods	and	Applications.	John	Wiley	&	Sons,	

Ltd.,	Chichester,	West	Sussex,	UK,	2012.

Scientific	Working	Group	for	DNA	Analysis	Methods	(SWGDAM)	Revised	Validation	Guidelines.	

Forensic	Science	Communications.	July	2004,	6(4).

3a. In	what	ways	would	the	research	results	improve	current	laboratory	capabilities?

Thorough	developmental	validations	allow	laboratories	to	easily	bring	new	panels	and	species	on	

board	in	their	laboratories.	This	saves	time	and	resources	and	facilitates	the	wide-spread	use	of	
Version	1.1	/	Date	of	Issue:	2.09.16 /	Issuing	Authority:	Forensic	Science	Standards	Board	(FSSB)

standardized	panels	and	databases.	Validation	also	brings	all	work	to	a	higher	and	stronger	legal	

standard.

3b. In	what	ways	would	the	research	results	improve	understanding	of	the	scientific	basis	for	the	

subcommittee(s)?

Having	thorough	validations	completed	increases	standardization	which	ensures	that	similar	methods	

and	terminology	is	used	between	laboratories.

3c.		In	what	ways	would	the	research	results	improve	services	to	the	criminal	justice	system?

Currently,	most	consumers	must	have	testing	done	at	whichever	laboratory	has	the	appropriate	

database	for	the	needed	species	and	population.	If	panels	were	standardized,	databases	could	be	built	

jointly	and	shared,	and	multiple	labs	would	be	able	to	provide	services	to	consumers.		The	cost	for	

validation	of	panels	and	databases	would	be	decreased.	Additionally,	standardized	panels	would	

ensure	a	minimum	number	of	informative	loci	are	used.		Thorough	validation	improves	the	legal	

strength	of	the	results.

4.		Status	assessment	(I,	II,	III,	or	IV): I Major gap	in	

current	

knowledge

Minor	gap	in	

current	

knowledge

No	or	limited

current	research	

is	being	conducted

I III

Existing current	

research	is	being	

conducted

II IV

This	research	need	has	been	identified	by	one	or	more	subcommittees	of	OSAC	and	is	being	provided	as	an	

informational	resource	to	the	community.

Approvals:

Subcommittee Approval	date: 2/3/16

(Approval	is	by	majority	vote	of	subcommittee.	Once	approved,	forward	to	SAC.)

SAC

1.		Does	the	SAC	agree	with	the	research	need? Yes x No

2.		Does	the	SAC	agree	with	the	status	assessment? Yes x No

If	no,	what	is	the	status	assessment	of	the	SAC:

Approval	date: 3/16/2016
Version	1.1	/	Date	of	Issue:	2.09.16 /	Issuing	Authority:	Forensic	Science	Standards	Board	(FSSB)

(Approval	is	by	majority	vote	of	SAC.		Once	approved,	forward	to	NIST	for	posting.)