They noted that nuclear DNA from hair is not recoverable and that nuclear DNA analysis would be “highly desirable” but would require a different kind of biological sample — blood or bone — for which the authentication problems would need to be addressed separately.
They noted that the Münster result was “most likely” attributable to contamination, not definitively identified as such. This is an interpretation of a technical pattern, not a proven forensic finding about what specific contaminating individual contributed what specific sequence to the Münster samples.
They noted that the Baden House refused to provide access to Stéphanie’s remains, and that a theoretical matrilineal break in the descent chain between Stéphanie and her living descendants cannot be fully excluded without such access.
These limitations were stated clearly in the study. Media coverage of historical DNA findings often omits limitation discussions. The limitations do not undermine the core finding — that Hauser’s mitotype is different from the Baden mitotype — but they establish the proper scope of that finding and the appropriate level of confidence.
—
## The Investigators Who Built the Case
The collaborative structure of the 2024 study brought together researchers from multiple institutions with specific complementary expertise.
Walther Parson, at the Institute of Forensic Medicine at the Medical University of Innsbruck, contributed the PEC MPS methodology and the forensic molecular biology framework. His laboratory was the primary analytical site for three of the hair locks and developed the approach that distinguished authentic ancient DNA from contamination by fragment length.
Michael Hofreiter, at the University of Potsdam, contributed the whole genome sequencing of single-stranded mtDNA libraries applied to the fourth lock — the one that had also been in the Münster analysis. His laboratory’s independence from the Innsbruck group, and the blind design under which it operated, was central to the study’s methodological strength.