Cargando…

The risk of false inclusion of a relative in parentage testing – an in silico population study

AIM: To investigate the potential of false inclusion of a close genetic relative in paternity testing by using computer generated families. METHODS: 10 000 computer-simulated families over three generations were generated based on genotypes using 15 short tandem repeat loci. These data were used in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, James Chun-I, Tsai, Li-Chin, Chu, Pao-Ching, Lin, Yen-Yang, Lin, Chun-Yen, Huang, Tsun-Ying, Yu, Yu-Jen, Linacre, Adrian, Hsieh, Hsing-Mei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Croatian Medical Schools 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3692333/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23771756
http://dx.doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2013.54.257
_version_ 1782274598999425024
author Lee, James Chun-I
Tsai, Li-Chin
Chu, Pao-Ching
Lin, Yen-Yang
Lin, Chun-Yen
Huang, Tsun-Ying
Yu, Yu-Jen
Linacre, Adrian
Hsieh, Hsing-Mei
author_facet Lee, James Chun-I
Tsai, Li-Chin
Chu, Pao-Ching
Lin, Yen-Yang
Lin, Chun-Yen
Huang, Tsun-Ying
Yu, Yu-Jen
Linacre, Adrian
Hsieh, Hsing-Mei
author_sort Lee, James Chun-I
collection PubMed
description AIM: To investigate the potential of false inclusion of a close genetic relative in paternity testing by using computer generated families. METHODS: 10 000 computer-simulated families over three generations were generated based on genotypes using 15 short tandem repeat loci. These data were used in assessing the probability of inclusion or exclusion of paternity when the father is actually a sibling, grandparent, uncle, half sibling, cousin, or a random male. Further, we considered a duo case where the mother’s DNA type was not available and a trio case including the mother’s profile. RESULTS: The data showed that the duo scenario had the highest and lowest false inclusion rates when considering a sibling (19.03 ± 0.77%) and a cousin (0.51 ± 0.14%) as the father, respectively; and the rate when considering a random male was much lower (0.04 ± 0.04%). The situation altered slightly with a trio case where the highest rate (0.56 ± 0.15%) occurred when a paternal uncle was considered as the father, and the lowest rate (0.03 ± 0.03%) occurred when a cousin was considered as the father. We also report on the distribution of the numbers for non-conformity (non-matching loci) where the father is a close genetic relative. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the risk of false inclusion in parentage testing. These data provide a valuable reference when incorporating either a mutation in the father’s DNA type or if a close relative is included as being the father; particularly when there are varying numbers of non-matching loci.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3692333
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Croatian Medical Schools
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36923332013-06-27 The risk of false inclusion of a relative in parentage testing – an in silico population study Lee, James Chun-I Tsai, Li-Chin Chu, Pao-Ching Lin, Yen-Yang Lin, Chun-Yen Huang, Tsun-Ying Yu, Yu-Jen Linacre, Adrian Hsieh, Hsing-Mei Croat Med J Forensic Science AIM: To investigate the potential of false inclusion of a close genetic relative in paternity testing by using computer generated families. METHODS: 10 000 computer-simulated families over three generations were generated based on genotypes using 15 short tandem repeat loci. These data were used in assessing the probability of inclusion or exclusion of paternity when the father is actually a sibling, grandparent, uncle, half sibling, cousin, or a random male. Further, we considered a duo case where the mother’s DNA type was not available and a trio case including the mother’s profile. RESULTS: The data showed that the duo scenario had the highest and lowest false inclusion rates when considering a sibling (19.03 ± 0.77%) and a cousin (0.51 ± 0.14%) as the father, respectively; and the rate when considering a random male was much lower (0.04 ± 0.04%). The situation altered slightly with a trio case where the highest rate (0.56 ± 0.15%) occurred when a paternal uncle was considered as the father, and the lowest rate (0.03 ± 0.03%) occurred when a cousin was considered as the father. We also report on the distribution of the numbers for non-conformity (non-matching loci) where the father is a close genetic relative. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the risk of false inclusion in parentage testing. These data provide a valuable reference when incorporating either a mutation in the father’s DNA type or if a close relative is included as being the father; particularly when there are varying numbers of non-matching loci. Croatian Medical Schools 2013-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3692333/ /pubmed/23771756 http://dx.doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2013.54.257 Text en Copyright © 2013 by the Croatian Medical Journal. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Forensic Science
Lee, James Chun-I
Tsai, Li-Chin
Chu, Pao-Ching
Lin, Yen-Yang
Lin, Chun-Yen
Huang, Tsun-Ying
Yu, Yu-Jen
Linacre, Adrian
Hsieh, Hsing-Mei
The risk of false inclusion of a relative in parentage testing – an in silico population study
title The risk of false inclusion of a relative in parentage testing – an in silico population study
title_full The risk of false inclusion of a relative in parentage testing – an in silico population study
title_fullStr The risk of false inclusion of a relative in parentage testing – an in silico population study
title_full_unstemmed The risk of false inclusion of a relative in parentage testing – an in silico population study
title_short The risk of false inclusion of a relative in parentage testing – an in silico population study
title_sort risk of false inclusion of a relative in parentage testing – an in silico population study
topic Forensic Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3692333/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23771756
http://dx.doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2013.54.257
work_keys_str_mv AT leejameschuni theriskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT tsailichin theriskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT chupaoching theriskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT linyenyang theriskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT linchunyen theriskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT huangtsunying theriskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT yuyujen theriskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT linacreadrian theriskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT hsiehhsingmei theriskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT leejameschuni riskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT tsailichin riskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT chupaoching riskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT linyenyang riskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT linchunyen riskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT huangtsunying riskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT yuyujen riskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT linacreadrian riskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy
AT hsiehhsingmei riskoffalseinclusionofarelativeinparentagetestinganinsilicopopulationstudy