Forensic Science International: Genetics
Volume 5, Issue 1 , Pages 27-32 , January 2011

X-chromosome markers in kinship testing: A generalisation of the IBD approach identifying situations where their contribution is crucial

  • Nádia Pinto

      Affiliations

    • IPATIMUP, Instituto de Patologia e Imunologia Molecular da Universidade do Porto, Portugal
    • Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade do Porto, Portugal
    • Centro de Matemática da Universidade do Porto, Portugal
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: IPATIMUP, R. Dr. Roberto Frias s/n, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal. Tel.: +351 225570700; fax: +351 225570799.
    • ,
  • Leonor Gusmão

      Affiliations

    • IPATIMUP, Instituto de Patologia e Imunologia Molecular da Universidade do Porto, Portugal
    • ,
  • António Amorim

      Affiliations

    • IPATIMUP, Instituto de Patologia e Imunologia Molecular da Universidade do Porto, Portugal
    • Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade do Porto, Portugal

Received 27 October 2009 ,Revised 15 January 2010 ,Accepted 18 January 2010.

References 

  1. Gjertson DW, Brenner CH, Baur MP, Carracedo A, Guidet F, Luque JA, et al. ISFG: recommendations on biostatistics in paternity testing. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2007;1:223–231
  2. Egeland T, Sheehan N. On identification problems requiring linked autosomal markers. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2008;2:219–225
  3. Szibor R, Krawczak M, Hering S, Edelmann J, Kuhlisch E, Krause D. Use of X-linked markers for forensic purposes. Int. J. Legal Med. 2003;117:67–74
  4. Krawczak M. Kinship testing with X-chromosomal markers: mathematical and statistical issues. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2007;1:111–114
  5. Abecasis GR, Cherny SS, Cookson WO, Cardon LR. Merlin-rapid analysis of dense genetic maps using sparse gene flow trees. Nat. Genet. 2002;30:97–101
  6. Weir BS, Anderson AD, Hepler AB. Genetic relatedness analysis: modern data and new challenges. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2006;7:771–780
  7. Jacquard A. The Genetic Structure of Populations, Biomathematics. vol. 5. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer-Verlag; 1974;pp. 102–107
  8. Pinto N, Gusmão L, Amorim A. Likelihood ratios in kinship analysis: contrasting kinship classes, not genealogies. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2009;doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2009.06.010
  9. Lange K. Mathematical and Statistical Methods for Genetic Analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1997;
  10. Carracedo A, Bar W, Lincoln P, Mayr W, Morling N, Olaisen B, et al. DNA Commission of the International Society for Forensic Genetics: guidelines for mitochondrial DNA typing. Forensic Sci. Int. 2000;110:79–85
  11. Gusmao L, Butler JM, Carracedo A, Gill P, Kayser M, Mayr WR, et al. International Society of Forensic Genetics. DNA Commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics (ISFG): an update of the recommendations on the use of Y-STRs in forensic analysis. Int. J. Legal Med. 2006;120:191–200

PII: S1872-4973(10)00019-0

doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2010.01.011

Forensic Science International: Genetics
Volume 5, Issue 1 , Pages 27-32 , January 2011

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution