ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2013
Single nucleotide polymorphism typing with massively parallel sequencing for human identification.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Bibliometric analysis of kinship analysis from 1960 to 2023: global trends and development.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Pooled it
- Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms in Distant Kinship Inference and Forensic Genetic Genealogy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Human adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells in vitro expansion for regenerative applications: tracking small genetic variants reveals dynamic changes within a genetically stable framework.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the ForenSeq® Kintelligence Kit and the FORensic Capture Enrichment Panel for Unidentified and Missing Persons Casework.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Article
- Past, Present and Future Perspectives of Forensic Genetics.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Review
- Review: Computational analysis of human skeletal remains in ancient DNA and forensic genetics.iScience · 2023Review
- A New Computational Deconvolution Algorithm for the Analysis of Forensic DNA Mixtures with SNP Markers.Genes · 2022Article
- Massively parallel sequencing of Cannabis sativa chloroplast hotspots for forensic typing.Journal of cannabis research · 2022Article
- A novel forensic panel of 186-plex SNPs and 123-plex STR loci based on massively parallel sequencing.International journal of legal medicine · 2021Article
- Identification of sequence polymorphisms at 58 STRs and 94 iiSNPs in a Tibetan population using massively parallel sequencing.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Massive parallel sequencing in forensics: advantages, issues, technicalities, and prospects.International journal of legal medicine · 2020Review
- Ancestry inference and admixture component estimations of Chinese Kazak group based on 165 AIM-SNPs via NGS platform.Journal of human genetics · 2020Article
- Alternatives to amelogenin markers for sex determination in humans and their forensic relevance.Molecular biology reports · 2020Review
- SMaSH: Sample matching using SNPs in humans.BMC genomics · 2019Article
- The QIAGEN 140-locus single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) panel for forensic identification using massively parallel sequencing (MPS): an evaluation and a direct-to-PCR trial.International journal of legal medicine · 2019Article
- Massively parallel sequencing analysis of nondegraded and degraded DNA mixtures using the ForenSeq™ system in combination with EuroForMix software.International journal of legal medicine · 2019Article
- Identification of a de novo fetal variant in osteogenesis imperfecta by targeted sequencing-based noninvasive prenatal testing.Journal of human genetics · 2018Article
- SNP typing using the HID-Ion AmpliSeq™ Identity Panel in a southern Chinese population.International journal of legal medicine · 2018Article
- TIA: algorithms for development of identity-linked SNP islands for analysis by massively parallel DNA sequencing.BMC bioinformatics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Ion AmpliSeq™ HID single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) panel, a primer pool of 103 autosomal SNPs and 33 Y-SNPs, was evaluated using the Ion 314™ Chip on the Ion PGM™ Sequencer with four DNA samples. The study focused on the sequencing of DNA at three different initial target quantities, related interpretation issues, and concordance of results with another sequencing platform, i.e., Genome Analyzer IIx. With 10 ng of template DNA, all genotypes at the 136 SNPs were detected. With 1 ng of DNA, all SNPs were detected and one SNP locus in one sample showed extreme heterozygote imbalance on allele coverage. With 100 pg of DNA, an average of 1.6 SNP loci were not detected, and an average of 4.3 SNPs showed heterozygote imbalance. The average sequence coverage was 945-600× at autosomal SNPs and 465-209× at Y-SNPs for 10 ng-100 pg of DNA. The average heterozygote allele coverage ratio was 89.6-61.8 % for 10 ng-100 pg of DNA. At 10 ng of DNA, all genotypes of the 95 SNPs shared between the two different sequencing platforms were concordant except for one SNP, rs1029047. The error was due to the misalignment of a flanking homopolymer. Overall, the data support that genotyping a large battery of SNPs is feasible with massively parallel sequencing. With barcode systems, better allele balance, and specifically designed alignment software, a more comprehensive rapid genotyping and more cost-effective results may be obtained from multiple samples in one analysis than are possible with current typing and capillary electrophoresis systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23736940What 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.