| Title |
Comparison between magnetic bead and qPCR library normalisation methods for forensic MPS genotyping
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Legal Medicine, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00414-017-1591-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bhavik Mehta, Samantha Venables, Paul Roffey |
| Abstract |
Massively parallel sequencing (MPS) is fast approaching operational use in forensic science, with the capability to analyse hundreds of DNA identity and DNA intelligence markers in multiple samples simultaneously. The ForenSeq™ DNA Signature Kit on MiSeq FGx™ (Illumina) workflow can provide profiles for autosomal short tandem repeats (STRs), X chromosome and Y chromosome STRs, identity single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), biogeographical ancestry SNPs and phenotype (eye and hair colour) SNPs from a sample. The library preparation procedure involves a series of steps including target amplification, library purification and library normalisation. This study highlights the comparison between the manufacturer recommended magnetic bead normalisation and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) methods. Furthermore, two qPCR chemistries, KAPA® (KAPA Biosystems) and NEBNext® (New England Bio Inc.), have also been compared. The qPCR outperformed the bead normalisation method, while the NEBNext® kit obtained higher genotype concordance than KAPA®. The study also established an MPS workflow that can be utilised in any operational forensic laboratory. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 19% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 14 March 2019.
All research outputs
#7,032,173
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#352
of 2,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,342
of 310,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#6
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,084 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 310,397 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.