2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.03.041
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

DNA analysis of human skeletal remains from the 1845 Franklin expedition

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To eliminate the possibility of contamination of the NgLj-3 samples with modern DNA, four individuals who had come into direct contact with the remains, including three of the authors, provided buccal swab samples for comparison with the archaeological samples. None of the latter samples yielded sequences that matched the four modern samples, indicating no contamination of the archaeological samples with the DNA from these individuals (see Stenton, Keenleyside, Fratpietro, & Park, 2017). Members of the research team had no direct contact with the buccal swab sample (FR-027-2019) submitted by the presumed descendant donor.…”
Section: Dna Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To eliminate the possibility of contamination of the NgLj-3 samples with modern DNA, four individuals who had come into direct contact with the remains, including three of the authors, provided buccal swab samples for comparison with the archaeological samples. None of the latter samples yielded sequences that matched the four modern samples, indicating no contamination of the archaeological samples with the DNA from these individuals (see Stenton, Keenleyside, Fratpietro, & Park, 2017). Members of the research team had no direct contact with the buccal swab sample (FR-027-2019) submitted by the presumed descendant donor.…”
Section: Dna Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More broadly speaking, it is anthropological knowledge applied to legal issues (Palo et al, 2007;Slavec, 2012). Recovery, description, and identification of human skeletal remains are the standard work of forensic anthropologists (Palo et al, 2007;Slavec, 2012;Gomes et al, 2017;Stenton et al, 2017). The condition of the evidence varies greatly, including decomposing, burned, cremated, fragmented, or disarticulated remains (Thompson, 2003).…”
Section: Control Region Of Mtdna As a Reliable Tool In Forensic Anthrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Without DNA technology, more than half of the identified victims would not have been identified (Ballantyne, 1997). The human mtDNA has been proven to be a useful tool for identification crime victim's especially skeletal remains (Holland and Parsons, 1999;Bender et al, 2000;Rudbeck et al, 2005;Torroni et al, 2006;Palo et al, 2007;Adams et al, 2008;Alaeddini et al, 2010;Shinoda, 2010;Köhnemann and Pfeiffer, 2011;Blau et al, 2014;Hayat et al, 2016;Amer et al, 2017;Gomes et al, 2017;Stenton et al, 2017;Calacal et al, 2018;Mendisco et al, 2018).…”
Section: Control Region Of Mtdna As a Reliable Tool In Forensic Anthrmentioning
confidence: 99%