↓ Skip to main content

One person with two DNA profiles: a(nother) case of mosaicism or chimerism

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Legal Medicine, February 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
One person with two DNA profiles: a(nother) case of mosaicism or chimerism
Published in
International Journal of Legal Medicine, February 2009
DOI 10.1007/s00414-009-0331-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vincent Castella, Maria del Mar Lesta, Patrice Mangin

Abstract

Nuclear DNA markers, such as short tandem repeats (STR), are widely used for crime investigation and paternity testing. STR were used to determine whether a piece of tissue regurgitated by a dog was part of the penis of a dead, emasculated, man. Unexpectedly, when analyzing the recovered material and a blood sample from the deceased, five out of the 18 loci differed. According to the results, one could have concluded that these samples originated from two different persons. However, taking into account contextual information and data from complementary genetic analyses, the most likely hypothesis was that the deceased was a genetic mosaic or a chimera. Within a forensic genetic context, such genetic peculiarities may prevent associating the perpetrator of an offense with a stain left at a crime scene or lead to false paternity exclusions. Fast recognition of mosaics or chimeras, adapted sampling scheme, as well as careful interpretation of the data should allow avoiding such pitfalls.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 4%
Unknown 27 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 18%
Student > Master 5 18%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 14%
Lecturer 3 11%
Other 7 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 18%
Unspecified 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Other 3 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 05 June 2014.
All research outputs
#1,648,318
of 12,226,511 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#81
of 1,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,972
of 199,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,226,511 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,049 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 199,082 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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.