ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2016
Selection of highly informative SNP markers for population affiliation of major US populations.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unsupervised discovery of ancestry-informative markers and genetic admixture proportions in biobank-scale datasets.American journal of human genetics · 2023Article
- Extensive set of African ancestry-informative markers (AIMs) to study ancestry and population health.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Forensic Feature Exploration and Comprehensive Genetic Insights Into Yugu Ethnic Minority and Northern Han PopulationFrontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Comprehensive Insights Into Forensic Features and Genetic Background of Chinese Northwest Hui Group Using Six Distinct Categories of 231 Molecular Markers.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Ancestry-informative marker (AIM) SNP panel for the Malay population.International journal of legal medicine · 2020Article
- Blood and dietary magnesium levels are not linked with lower prostate cancer risk in black or white men.Cancer letters · 2019Article
- Consequences of PCA graphs, SNP codings, and PCA variants for elucidating population structure.PloS one · 2019Article
- Selection of Optimal Ancestry Informative Markers for Classification and Ancestry Proportion Estimation in Pigs.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- Empirical testing of a 23-AIMs panel of SNPs for ancestry evaluations in four major US populations.International journal of legal medicine · 2016Article
- Genetic structure and differentiation analysis of a Eurasian Uyghur population by use of 27 continental ancestry-informative SNPs.International journal of legal medicine · 2016Article
- [Efficiency of 27-plex single nucleotide polymorphism multiplex system for ancestry inference in different populations].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2016Article
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
Ancestry informative markers (AIMs) can be used to detect and adjust for population stratification and predict the ancestry of the source of an evidence sample. Autosomal single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are the best candidates for AIMs. It is essential to identify the most informative AIM SNPs across relevant populations. Several informativeness measures for ancestry estimation have been used for AIMs selection: absolute allele frequency differences (δ), F statistics (F ST), and informativeness for assignment measure (In). However, their efficacy has not been compared objectively, particularly for determining affiliations of major US populations. In this study, these three measures were directly compared for AIMs selection among four major US populations, i.e., African American, Caucasian, East Asian, and Hispanic American. The results showed that the F ST panel performed slightly better for population resolution based on principal component analysis (PCA) clustering than did the δ panel and both performed better than the In panel. Therefore, the 23 AIMs selected by the F ST measure were used to characterize the four major American populations. Genotype data of nine sample populations were used to evaluate the efficiency of the 23-AIMs panel. The results indicated that individuals could be correctly assigned to the major population categories. Our AIMs panel could contribute to the candidate pool of AIMs for potential forensic identification purposes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26645290What 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.