ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2014
Mutation rates of 15 X chromosomal short tandem repeat markers.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2014. 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.
- Linkage, recombination and mutation rate analyses of 16 X-chromosomal STR loci in Sri Lankan Sinhalese pedigrees.International journal of legal medicine · 2022Article
- German population data for 18 X-STRs: a hexaplex PCR adding two clusters of X-STRs to the Argus X-12 set and expanding the German haplotype databases.International journal of legal medicine · 2020Article
- Genetic polymorphisms and mutation rates of 16 X-STRs in a Han Chinese population of Beijing and application examples in second-degree kinship cases.International journal of legal medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Though allele frequency data for a variety of X chromosomal short tandem repeat (STR) markers in a range of populations have been reported, fewer studies of mutation rates in these same markers or populations are available. In order to address possible mismatches during kinship analysis due to mutation, a robust estimate of the rate of mutation must be established. Here, mutation rates in three US populations have been determined for a total of 15 markers (DXS6789, DXS9902, DXS7132, DXS7130, DXS6795, DXS10147, DXS8378, DXS7423, HPRTB, DXS101, DXS7424, GATA31E08, GATA172D05, GATA165B12, and DXS6803). Eighteen mutations over 20,625 meioses were observed, and the overall X STR mutation rate in this study was found to be 8.73 × 10(-4) (95 % CI, 5.2-13.8 × 10(-4)). A review of published mutation rate studies revealed similar findings in other global populations, and allowed the compilation of a combined dataset of 81,310 meioses which can be employed by the forensic community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24811886What 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.