4.5 Article

Evaluating 130 microhaplotypes across a global set of 83 populations

Journal

FORENSIC SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL-GENETICS
Volume 29, Issue -, Pages 29-37

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.03.014

Keywords

Microhaplotype; SNP; Ancestry; Massively parallel sequencing

Funding

  1. NIJ by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice [2013-DN-BX-K023, 2014-DN-BX-K030]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Today the primary DNA markers used in forensics are short tandem repeat (STR) polymorphisms (STRPs), initially selected because they are highly polymorphic. However, the increasingly common need to deal with samples with a mixture of DNA from two or more individuals sometimes is complicated by the inherent stutter involved with PCR amplification, especially in strongly unbalanced mixtures when the minor component coincides with the stutter range of the major component. Also, the STRPs in use provide little evidence of ancestry of a single source sample beyond broad continental resolution. Methodologies for analyzing DNA have become much more powerful in recent years. Massively parallel sequencing (MPS) is a new method being considered for routine use in forensics. Primarily to aid in mixture deconvolution and avoid the issue of stutter, we have begun to investigate a new type of forensic marker, microhaplotype loci, that will provide useful information on mixtures of DNA and on ancestry when typed using massively parallel sequencing (MPS). We have identified 130 loci and estimated their haplotype (allele) frequencies in 83 different population samples. Many of these loci are shown to be highly informative for individual identification and for mixture identification and deconvolution. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NCND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available