ArticleGenes2024
Biogeographical Ancestry Analyses Using the ForenSeq
Article in Genes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ancestry estimation: Methodological evolution and forensic implications.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2026Review
- Contrasting Maternal, Paternal, and Biparental Ancestry of Populations From the Caribbean Coast of Colombia.American journal of biological anthropology · 2026Article
- Responding to the call: Population affinity estimation in a South African forensic context of identification - are we helping or harming?Forensic science international. Synergy · 2025Article
- Advancing kidney transplantation in black patients: a genetics-based and personalized approach under NICE, KDIGO, and ERBP guidelines.Renal failure · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The inference of biogeographical ancestry (BGA) can assist in police investigations of serious crime cases and help to identify missing people and victims of mass disasters. In this study, we evaluated the typing performance of 56 ancestry-informative SNPs in 177 samples using the ForenSeq™ DNA Signature Prep Kit on the MiSeq FGx system. Furthermore, we compared the prediction accuracy of the tools Universal Analysis Software v1.2 (UAS), the FROG-kb, and GenoGeographer when inferring the ancestry of 503 Europeans, 22 non-Europeans, and 5 individuals with co-ancestry. The kit was highly sensitive with complete aiSNP profiles in samples with as low as 250pg input DNA. However, in line with others, we observed low read depth and occasional drop-out in some SNPs. Therefore, we suggest not using less than the recommended 1ng of input DNA. FROG-kb and GenoGeographer accurately predicted both Europeans (99.6% and 91.8% correct, respectively) and non-Europeans (95.4% and 90.9% correct, respectively). The UAS was highly accurate when predicting Europeans (96.0% correct) but performed poorer when predicting non-Europeans (40.9% correct). None of the tools were able to correctly predict individuals with co-ancestry. Our study demonstrates that the use of multiple prediction tools will increase the prediction accuracy of BGA inference in forensic casework.
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.