↓ Skip to main content

As solid as a rock—comparison of CE- and MPS-based analyses of the petrosal bone as a source of DNA for forensic identification of challenging cranial bones

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Legal Medicine, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
As solid as a rock—comparison of CE- and MPS-based analyses of the petrosal bone as a source of DNA for forensic identification of challenging cranial bones
Published in
International Journal of Legal Medicine, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00414-017-1653-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Galina Kulstein, Thorsten Hadrys, Peter Wiegand

Abstract

Short tandem repeat (STR) typing from skeletal remains can be a difficult task. Dependent on the environmental conditions of the provenance of the bones, DNA can be degraded and STR typing inhibited. Generally, dense and compact bones are known to preserve DNA better. Several studies already proved that femora and teeth have high DNA typing success rates. Unfortunately, these elements are not present in all cases involving skeletal remains. Processing partial or singular skeletal elements, it is favorable to select bone areas where DNA preservation is comparably higher. Especially, cranial bones are often accidentally discovered during criminal investigations. The cranial bone is composed of multiple parts. In this examination, we evaluated the potential of the petrous bone for human identification of skeletal remains in forensic case work. Material from different sections of eight unknown cranial bones and-where available-additionally other skeletal elements, collected at the DNA department of the Institute of Legal Medicine in Ulm, Germany, from 2010 to 2017, were processed with an optimized DNA extraction and STR typing strategy. The results highlight that STR typing from the petrous bones leads to reportable profiles in all individuals, even in cases where the analysis of the parietal bone failed. Moreover, the comparison of capillary electrophorese (CE) typing to massively parallel sequencing (MPS) analysis shows that MPS has the potential to analyze degraded human remains and is even capable to provide additional information about phenotype and ancestry of unknown individuals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 24 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 27 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 August 2017.
All research outputs
#12,855,965
of 22,994,508 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#661
of 2,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,404
of 316,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#10
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,994,508 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,081 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,684 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.