In State v. Van Adams, 194 Ariz. 408 P34, 984 P.2d 16, 26-27 (1999), the defendant in a criminal case challenged the application of certain identification methodologies to DNA evidence. The theories underlying DNA identification were not in question; the defendant attacked only the application of the theory. Id. The defendant's attack, the court noted, questioned the credibility of the evidence or weight to be accorded it by the jury, not its admissibility under Frye. Id. at 418-419 P34, 984 P.2d at 26-27. The court approved the settled proposition that once a scientific theory, principle, or test is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community, the jury has the task of "weighing the significance of any errors that may have occurred in applying generally accepted principles to the facts of a particular case." Id.