How many familial relationship testing results could be wrong?


Autoři: Jianye Ge aff001;  Bruce Budowle aff001
Působiště autorů: Center for Human Identification, University of North Texas Health Science Center, Fort Worth, Texas, United States of America aff001
Vyšlo v časopise: How many familial relationship testing results could be wrong?. PLoS Genet 16(8): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1008929
Kategorie: Viewpoints
doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1008929


Zdroje

1. Jeffreys AJ, Wilson V, Thein SL. Hypervariable ‘minisatellite’regions in human DNA. Nature. 1985;314(6006):67–73. doi: 10.1038/314067a0

2. AABB Relationship Testing Annual Reports. http://www.aabb.org/sa/facilities/Pages/relationshipreports.aspx. [cited 2020 May 23].

3. Gan N. Surge in China DNA paternity tests after call to record nation’s unregistered citizens (18 February 2016). https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/1913870/surge-china-dna-paternity-tests-after-call-record-nations. [cited 2020 May 23].

4. Granados MP, Ngueng FI, Joly Y. Does the end justify the means? A comparative study of the use of DNA testing in the context of family reunification. Journal of Law and the Biosciences. 2017;4(2):250–81.

5. US ICE. ICE awards new contract for rapid DNA testing at southwest border, expands pilot program (18 June 2019). https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/ice-awards-new-contract-rapid-dna-testing-southwest-border-expands-pilot-program. [cited 2020 May 23].

6. Li L, Ge J, Zhang S, Guo J, Zhao S, Li C, et al. Maternity exclusion with a very high autosomal STRs kinship index. International journal of legal medicine. 2012;126(4):645–8. doi: 10.1007/s00414-012-0668-8 22450431

7. Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM). Interpretation guidelines for autosomal STR typing by forensic DNA testing laboratories.

8. Federal Bureau of Investigation. https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis. [cited 2020 May 23].

9. Hares DR. Selection and implementation of expanded CODIS core loci in the United States. Forensic Science International: Genetics. 2015;17:33–4.

10. Ge J, Budowle B, Chakraborty R. Choosing relatives for DNA identification of missing persons. Journal of forensic sciences. 2011;56:S23–S8. doi: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2010.01631.x 21155801

11. Ge J, Chakraborty R, Eisenberg A, Budowle B. Comparisons of familial DNA database searching strategies. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(6):1448–56. doi: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01867.x 21827463

12. Ge J, Budowle B, Chakraborty R. DNA identification by pedigree likelihood ratio accommodating population substructure and mutations. Investig Genet. 2010;1(1):8. doi: 10.1186/2041-2223-1-8 21092343

13. Budowle B, Ge J, Chakraborty R, Gill-King H. Use of prior odds for missing persons identifications. Investigative genetics. 2011;2(1):15. doi: 10.1186/2041-2223-2-15 21707977

14. Chang CC, Chow CC, Tellier LC, Vattikuti S, Purcell SM, Lee JJ. Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets. Gigascience. 2015;4(1):s13742-015-0047-8.

15. Kaiser A. We will find you: DNA search used to nab Golden State Killer can home in on about 60% of white Americans. Science, Oct. 11, 2018; https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/10/we-will-find-you-dna-search-used-nab-golden-state-killer-can-home-about-60-white. [cited 2020 May 23].


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS Genetics


2020 Číslo 8

Nejčtenější v tomto čísle

Tomuto tématu se dále věnují…


Kurzy Doporučená témata Časopisy
Přihlášení
Zapomenuté heslo

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte se

Zapomenuté heslo

Zadejte e-mailovou adresu se kterou jste vytvářel(a) účet, budou Vám na ni zaslány informace k nastavení nového hesla.

Přihlášení

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte se

VIRTUÁLNÍ ČEKÁRNA ČR Jste praktický lékař nebo pediatr? Zapojte se! Jste praktik nebo pediatr? Zapojte se!

×