2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.10.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Developmental validation of a custom panel including 165 Y-SNPs for Chinese Y-chromosomal haplogroups dissection using the ion S5 XL system

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

4
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recently, MPS technology has attracted much interest in the field of forensic science. Multiple studies have been carried out to study various forensic markers using MPS technology . All of these studies imply that MPS holds promise for forensic applications.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, MPS technology has attracted much interest in the field of forensic science. Multiple studies have been carried out to study various forensic markers using MPS technology . All of these studies imply that MPS holds promise for forensic applications.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The GD of rs771783753 ([CAT/-]) was reported to be 0.0641 in the Xinjiang Mongolian group [9], while in our study it was much higher (0.443484). The second indel rs759551978, an indel mutation [AGAT/-], representing haplogroup M117-O2a2b1a1, was reported to fail to obtain accurate genotyping after quality control when constructing a panel on the Ion S5 XL System (Thermo Fisher Scientific) [13]. But in this panel, it was successfully amplified.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on AmpFlSTR®Y ler TM plus and precise identi cation PrecisionID system (Ion Chef and Ion S5XL), 165 Y-SNP haplotype groups were constructed and detected [14], and likelihood was calculated by family search index (FSindex) to try to solve this problem. This study showed that the sample case 5 and case 6 had the same Y-STR typing 57/60 and 44/45 respectively.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%