ArticleProteomics2017
Proteomic analysis of hair shafts from monozygotic twins: Expression profiles and genetically variant peptides.
Article in Proteomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pepsin Digestion for Proteomic Studies of the Human Hair Shaft.Rapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM · 2026Article
- Human hair as a diagnostic tool in medicine.Biochemistry and biophysics reports · 2025Review
- Enamel proteins reveal biological sex and genetic variability in southern AfricanScience (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Proteins in scalp hair of preschool children.Psych · 2024Article
- Witch Nails (Krt90whnl): A spontaneous mouse mutation affecting nail growth and development.PloS one · 2022Article
- Age-Related Changes in Hair Shaft Protein Profiling and Genetically Variant Peptides.Forensic science international. Genetics · 2020Article
- Potential use of human hair shaft keratin peptide signatures to distinguish gender and ethnicity.PeerJ · 2020Article
- Hair Proteome Variation at Different Body Locations on Genetically Variant Peptide Detection for Protein-Based Human Identification.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Corneocyte proteomics: Applications to skin biology and dermatology.Experimental dermatology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Forensic association of hair shaft evidence with individuals is currently assessed by comparing mitochondrial DNA haplotypes of reference and casework samples, primarily for exclusionary purposes. Present work tests and validates more recent proteomic approaches to extract quantitative transcriptional and genetic information from hair samples of monozygotic twin pairs, which would be predicted to partition away from unrelated individuals if the datasets contain identifying information. Protein expression profiles and polymorphic, genetically variant hair peptides were generated from ten pairs of monozygotic twins. Profiling using the protein tryptic digests revealed that samples from identical twins had typically an order of magnitude fewer protein expression differences than unrelated individuals. The data did not indicate that the degree of difference within twin pairs increased with age. In parallel, data from the digests were used to detect genetically variant peptides that result from common nonsynonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms in genes expressed in the hair follicle. Compilation of the variants permitted sorting of the samples by hierarchical clustering, permitting accurate matching of twin pairs. The results demonstrate that genetic differences are detectable by proteomic methods and provide a framework for developing quantitative statistical estimates of personal identification that increase the value of hair shaft evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.