ArticleMolecular biology reports2012
Power of exclusion of 19 microsatellite markers for parentage testing in river buffalo (Bubalus bubalis).
Article in Molecular biology reports, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- GT-Seq Panel Development for Species Identification and Parentage Analysis of Closely Related Hybridising Scaphirhynchus Sturgeons.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Article
- Polymorphism analysis of tri- and tetranucleotide repeat microsatellite markers in Hanwoo cattle.Journal of animal science and technology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Genetic Diversity and Structure of Turkish Water Buffalo Population by Using 20 Microsatellite Markers.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present study, 19 microsatellite markers were assessed for their power of exclusion to test parentage in river buffalo. Microsatellite genotypes of 216 unrelated buffaloes belonging to five different breeds were utilized for the study. The probabilities of exclusion were calculated for three hypothetical situations viz. paternity testing (PE1), one parental genotype unavailable (PE2) and exclusion of both parents i.e. substituted offspring (PE3). The mean probability of exclusion across 19 investigated markers in buffalo was 0.578 (PE1), 0.405 (PE2) and 0.764 (PE3) respectively. The probability of exclusion for paternity (PE1) ranged between 0.297 and 0.814 across different markers. The exclusion probability for the cases one parent unavailable (PE2) and substituted offspring (PE3) varied from 0.143 to 0.688 and 0.465 to 0.946 respectively. Polymorphism information content and expected heterozygosity were found to have significantly high correlation with probability of exclusion of microsatellite markers. The cumulative PE1 of nine marker loci was estimated to be 0.9999 while in case of absence of one of the parental genotypes, a minimum of 11 markers were required to achieve a cumulative PE2 of 0.999. In conclusion, the present study proposes two multiplex sets with four and five markers respectively for routine parentage testing in buffalo and an additional set of four markers for doubtful cases of paternity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22555978What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.