Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32507908›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2020

DNA typing from skeletal remains: a comparison between capillary electrophoresis and massively parallel sequencing platforms.

Zhiyong Liu, Linlin Gao, Jingjing Zhang, Qingwei Fan, Man Chen, Feng Cheng, Wanting Li, Linyu Shi, Xiaomeng Zhang, Jiarong Zhang and 2 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 94% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Zhiyong LiuBeijing Institute of Genomics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China.
Linlin GaoInstitute of Criminal Science and Technology of Hangzhou Public Security Bureau, Hangzhou, 310000, China.
Jingjing ZhangBeijing Huayan Judicial Authentication Institute, Beijing, 100192, China.
Qingwei FanSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, 030001, China.
Man ChenBeijing Institute of Genomics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China.
Feng ChengSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, 030001, China.
Wanting LiSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, 030001, China.
Linyu ShiSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, 030001, China.
Xiaomeng ZhangSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, 030001, China.
Jiarong ZhangSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, 030001, China.
Gengqian ZhangSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, 030001, China. gengqianzhang@sxmu.edu.cn.
Jiangwei YanSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, 030001, China. yanjw@sxmu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0359-4508
Shanxi Medical University · CNChinese Academy of Sciences · CNShanghai Public Security Bureau · CN

Funding

National Key R&D Program of China 2017YFC0803504
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Skeletal remains encountered frequently in forensic applications are a challenging specimen, since their DNA is usually degraded due to harsh conditions, limiting the utilization of skeletal DNA. Forensic scientists have tried various methods to extract DNA from skeletal remains of low quantity and poor quality or improve detecting technology for more information from compromised DNA. Compared with traditional capillary electrophoresis (CE), massively parallel sequencing (MPS) is more sensitive to shorter fragments, able to detect allele sequences for variations from core motif or flanking regions, and able to detect more markers with a higher discrimination power. In this study, short tandem repeats (STR) and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) from 35 human skeletons were genotyped by MPS platform, and CE method was also used to perform STR genotyping. The results indicated that the detection rates reached 100.00% in 16 of 35 samples with MPS method, while the same 100.00% was reached in only 9 samples with CE. The success rates of MPS were also higher than that of CE method in shared 21 loci (excluding Y-indel, DYS391, and SE33), especially in loci detected by MPS method only. Besides, all SNPs (124 and 90 SNPs in males and females) were detected in 18 samples of 35 samples by MPS method. Some intra-allelic sequence variants were observed in eight loci (D21S11, D8S1179, D5S2800, D3S1358, vWA, D2S1338, D1S1656, D12S391) using MPS technology. Interestingly, there is a sample showing genotyping disagreement in FGA locus. The clone sequencing verified that a "T" deletion discovered in flanking sequence of FGA led to wrong genotyping on Ampliseq Converge. Our results indicated that MPS could be adopted in qualified labs as a supplementary when the DNA of skeletal remains are hard to identify.

Indexed as

Body RemainsElectrophoresis, CapillaryHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingSequence Analysis, DNAAllelesDNADNA FingerprintingFemaleGenetic LociGenotypeGenotyping TechniquesHumansMaleMicrosatellite RepeatsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideDNAForensic ScienceMPSSequence variantsSkeletal remainsSTR typing

Identifiers

PMID32507908
OpenAlexW3033858693

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.