↓ Skip to main content

Comparative tolerance of two massively parallel sequencing systems to common PCR inhibitors

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Comparative tolerance of two massively parallel sequencing systems to common PCR inhibitors
Published in
International Journal of Legal Medicine, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00414-017-1693-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kyleen Elwick, Xiangpei Zeng, Jonathan King, Bruce Budowle, Sheree Hughes-Stamm

Abstract

Human remains can be severely affected by the environment, and the DNA may be damaged, degraded, and/or inhibited. In this study, a DNA sample (at 1 ng DNA target input in triplicate) was spiked with five concentrations of five inhibitors (humic acid, melanin, hematin, collagen, and calcium) and sequenced with both the HID-Ion AmpliSeq™ Library Kit and ID panel on the Ion PGM™ System and the ForenSeq DNA Signature Prep Kit on the MiSeq FGx™. The objective of this study was to compare the baseline tolerance of the two sequencing chemistries and platforms to common inhibitors encountered in human remains recovered from missing person cases. The two chemistries generally were comparable but not always susceptible to the same inhibitors or at the same capacity. The HID-Ion AmpliSeq™ Library Kit and ID panel and the ForenSeq DNA Signature Prep Kit both were susceptible to humic acid, melanin, and collagen; however, the ForenSeq kit showed greater inhibition to melanin and collagen than the AmpliSeq™ kit. In contrast, the ForenSeq kit was resistant to the effects of hematin and calcium, whereas the AmpliSeq™ kit was highly inhibited by hematin. Short tandem repeats (STRs) and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) showed the same trend among inhibitors when using the ForenSeq kit. Generally, locus read depth, heterozygote allele balance, and the numbers of alleles typed were inversely correlated with increasing inhibitor concentration. The larger STR loci were affected more so by the presence of inhibitors compared to smaller STR amplicons and SNP loci. Additionally, it does not appear that sequence noise is affected by the inhibitors. The noise percentage, however, does increase as the inhibitor concentration increases, due to the decrease in locus read depth and not likely because of chemistry effects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 15%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 14 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 16 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,480,316
of 23,003,906 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#971
of 2,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,772
of 320,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#29
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,003,906 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 320,759 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.