Cargando…

In silico and in vitro comparative analysis to select, validate and test SNPs for human identification

BACKGROUND: The recent advances in human genetics have recently provided new insights into phenotypic variation and genome variability. Current forensic DNA techniques involve the search for genetic similarities and differences between biological samples. Consequently the selection of ideal genomic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Giardina, Emiliano, Pietrangeli, Ilenia, Martone, Claudia, Asili, Paola, Predazzi, Irene, Marsala, Patrizio, Gabriele, Luciano, Pipolo, Claudio, Ricci, Omero, Solla, Gianluca, Sineo, Luca, Spinella, Aldo, Novelli, Giuseppe
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2222643/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18076761
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-8-457
_version_ 1782149363127025664
author Giardina, Emiliano
Pietrangeli, Ilenia
Martone, Claudia
Asili, Paola
Predazzi, Irene
Marsala, Patrizio
Gabriele, Luciano
Pipolo, Claudio
Ricci, Omero
Solla, Gianluca
Sineo, Luca
Spinella, Aldo
Novelli, Giuseppe
author_facet Giardina, Emiliano
Pietrangeli, Ilenia
Martone, Claudia
Asili, Paola
Predazzi, Irene
Marsala, Patrizio
Gabriele, Luciano
Pipolo, Claudio
Ricci, Omero
Solla, Gianluca
Sineo, Luca
Spinella, Aldo
Novelli, Giuseppe
author_sort Giardina, Emiliano
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The recent advances in human genetics have recently provided new insights into phenotypic variation and genome variability. Current forensic DNA techniques involve the search for genetic similarities and differences between biological samples. Consequently the selection of ideal genomic biomarkers for human identification is crucial in order to ensure the highest stability and reproducibility of results. RESULTS: In the present study, we selected and validated 24 SNPs which are useful in human identification in 1,040 unrelated samples originating from three different populations (Italian, Benin Gulf and Mongolian). A Rigorous in silico selection of these markers provided a list of SNPs with very constant frequencies across the populations tested as demonstrated by the F(st )values. Furthermore, these SNPs also showed a high specificity for the human genome (only 5 SNPs gave positive results when amplified in non-human DNA). CONCLUSION: Comparison between in silico and in vitro analysis showed that current SNPs databases can efficiently improve and facilitate the selection of markers because most of the analyses performed (F(st), r(2), heterozigosity) in more than 1,000 samples confirmed available population data.
format Text
id pubmed-2222643
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-22226432008-02-01 In silico and in vitro comparative analysis to select, validate and test SNPs for human identification Giardina, Emiliano Pietrangeli, Ilenia Martone, Claudia Asili, Paola Predazzi, Irene Marsala, Patrizio Gabriele, Luciano Pipolo, Claudio Ricci, Omero Solla, Gianluca Sineo, Luca Spinella, Aldo Novelli, Giuseppe BMC Genomics Research Article BACKGROUND: The recent advances in human genetics have recently provided new insights into phenotypic variation and genome variability. Current forensic DNA techniques involve the search for genetic similarities and differences between biological samples. Consequently the selection of ideal genomic biomarkers for human identification is crucial in order to ensure the highest stability and reproducibility of results. RESULTS: In the present study, we selected and validated 24 SNPs which are useful in human identification in 1,040 unrelated samples originating from three different populations (Italian, Benin Gulf and Mongolian). A Rigorous in silico selection of these markers provided a list of SNPs with very constant frequencies across the populations tested as demonstrated by the F(st )values. Furthermore, these SNPs also showed a high specificity for the human genome (only 5 SNPs gave positive results when amplified in non-human DNA). CONCLUSION: Comparison between in silico and in vitro analysis showed that current SNPs databases can efficiently improve and facilitate the selection of markers because most of the analyses performed (F(st), r(2), heterozigosity) in more than 1,000 samples confirmed available population data. BioMed Central 2007-12-12 /pmc/articles/PMC2222643/ /pubmed/18076761 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-8-457 Text en Copyright © 2007 Giardina et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Giardina, Emiliano
Pietrangeli, Ilenia
Martone, Claudia
Asili, Paola
Predazzi, Irene
Marsala, Patrizio
Gabriele, Luciano
Pipolo, Claudio
Ricci, Omero
Solla, Gianluca
Sineo, Luca
Spinella, Aldo
Novelli, Giuseppe
In silico and in vitro comparative analysis to select, validate and test SNPs for human identification
title In silico and in vitro comparative analysis to select, validate and test SNPs for human identification
title_full In silico and in vitro comparative analysis to select, validate and test SNPs for human identification
title_fullStr In silico and in vitro comparative analysis to select, validate and test SNPs for human identification
title_full_unstemmed In silico and in vitro comparative analysis to select, validate and test SNPs for human identification
title_short In silico and in vitro comparative analysis to select, validate and test SNPs for human identification
title_sort in silico and in vitro comparative analysis to select, validate and test snps for human identification
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2222643/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18076761
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-8-457
work_keys_str_mv AT giardinaemiliano insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT pietrangeliilenia insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT martoneclaudia insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT asilipaola insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT predazziirene insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT marsalapatrizio insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT gabrieleluciano insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT pipoloclaudio insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT ricciomero insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT sollagianluca insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT sineoluca insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT spinellaaldo insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification
AT novelligiuseppe insilicoandinvitrocomparativeanalysistoselectvalidateandtestsnpsforhumanidentification