ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2023
Comparison of three massively parallel sequencing platforms for single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping in forensic genetics.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Individual identification and kinship testing from hair shaft nuclear DNA: leveraging short amplicon strategy and bioinformatics models.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a STR and SNP multiplex detection system (88 STRs and 348 SNPs) using massively parallel sequencing.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Three MPS platforms are being used in forensic genetic analysis, i.e., MiSeq FGx, Ion S5 XL, and MGISEQ-2000. However, few studies compared their performance. In this study, we sequenced 83 common SNPs of 71 samples using the ForenSeq™ DNA Signature Prep Kit on MiSeq FGx, the Precision ID Identity Panel on Ion S5 XL, and the MGIEasy Signature Identification Library Prep Kit on MGISEQ-2000 and then the performance was compared. Results showed that the MiSeq FGx had the highest sequence quality but the lowest sequencing depth and allele balance. Discordant genotypes were observed at six SNPs, which may be caused by variants at primer binding regions, indel errors, or misalignments. Besides, two kinds of background noises, allele-specific miscalled reads (ASMR) and allele-nonspecific miscalled reads (ANMR), were characterized. MGISEQ-2000 showed the highest level of ASMR while Ion S5 XL had the highest level of ANMR. Site- and genotype-dependent miscalled patterns were observed at several SNPs on Ion S5 XL and MGISEQ-2000, but few on MiSeq FGx. In conclusion, the three MPS platforms perform differently with respect to sequencing quality, sequencing depth, allele balance, concordance, and background noise. These findings may be useful for data comparison, mixture deconvolution, and heteroplasmy analysis in forensic genetics.
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.