Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28956146›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2018

Comparative tolerance of two massively parallel sequencing systems to common PCR inhibitors.

Kyleen Elwick, Xiangpei Zeng, Jonathan King, Bruce Budowle, Sheree Hughes-Stamm

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Developments in forensic DNA analysis.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2021
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Kyleen ElwickSam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX, USA.
Xiangpei ZengCenter for Human Identification, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd., Fort Worth, TX, 76107, USA. Xiangpei.Zeng@unthsc.edu.
Jonathan KingCenter for Human Identification, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd., Fort Worth, TX, 76107, USA.
Bruce BudowleCenter for Human Identification, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd., Fort Worth, TX, 76107, USA.
Sheree Hughes-StammSam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX, USA.
Sam Houston State University · USKing Abdulaziz University · SAUniversity of North Texas · USUniversity of North Texas Health Science Center · US

Funding

National Institute of Justice 2015-DN-BX-K066
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human remains can be severely affected by the environment, and the DNA may be damaged, degraded, and/or inhibited. In this study, a DNA sample (at 1 ng DNA target input in triplicate) was spiked with five concentrations of five inhibitors (humic acid, melanin, hematin, collagen, and calcium) and sequenced with both the HID-Ion AmpliSeq™ Library Kit and ID panel on the Ion PGM™ System and the ForenSeq DNA Signature Prep Kit on the MiSeq FGx™. The objective of this study was to compare the baseline tolerance of the two sequencing chemistries and platforms to common inhibitors encountered in human remains recovered from missing person cases. The two chemistries generally were comparable but not always susceptible to the same inhibitors or at the same capacity. The HID-Ion AmpliSeq™ Library Kit and ID panel and the ForenSeq DNA Signature Prep Kit both were susceptible to humic acid, melanin, and collagen; however, the ForenSeq kit showed greater inhibition to melanin and collagen than the AmpliSeq™ kit. In contrast, the ForenSeq kit was resistant to the effects of hematin and calcium, whereas the AmpliSeq™ kit was highly inhibited by hematin. Short tandem repeats (STRs) and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) showed the same trend among inhibitors when using the ForenSeq kit. Generally, locus read depth, heterozygote allele balance, and the numbers of alleles typed were inversely correlated with increasing inhibitor concentration. The larger STR loci were affected more so by the presence of inhibitors compared to smaller STR amplicons and SNP loci. Additionally, it does not appear that sequence noise is affected by the inhibitors. The noise percentage, however, does increase as the inhibitor concentration increases, due to the decrease in locus read depth and not likely because of chemistry effects.

Indexed as

DNA FingerprintingMicrosatellite RepeatsCalciumCollagenHeminHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansHumic SubstancesMaleMelaninsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSequence Analysis, DNACalciumCollagenHeminHumic SubstancesMelaninsForenSeq DNA Signature Prep KitHID-Ion AmpliSeq™ Library KitNoisePCR inhibitorsSNPSTR

Identifiers

PMID28956146
OpenAlexW2758458912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.