Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Polymorphic admixture typing in human ethnic populations.

Authors: M, Dean; J C, Stephens; C, Winkler; D A, Lomb; M, Ramsburg; R, Boaze; C, Stewart; +3 Authors

Polymorphic admixture typing in human ethnic populations.

Abstract

A panel of 257 RFLP loci was selected on the basis of high heterozygosity in Caucasian DNA surveys and equivalent spacing throughout the human genome. Probes from each locus were used in a Southern blot survey of allele frequency distribution for four human ethnic groups: Caucasian, African American, Asian (Chinese), and American Indian (Cheyenne). Nearly all RFLP loci were polymorphic in each group, albeit with a broad range of differing allele frequencies (delta). The distribution of frequency differences (delta values) was used for three purposes: (1) to provide estimates for genetic distance (differentiation) among these ethnic groups, (2) to revisit with a large data set the proportion of human genetic variation attributable to differentiation within ethnic groups, and (3) to identify loci with high delta values between recently admixed populations of use in mapping by admixture linkage disequilibrium (MALD). Although most markers display significant allele frequency differences between ethnic groups, the overall genetic distances between ethnic groups were small (.066-.098), and < 10% of the measured overall molecular genetic diversity in these human samples can be attributed to "racial" differentiation. The median delta values for pairwise comparisons between groups fell between .15 and .20, permitting identification of highly informative RFLP loci for MALD disease association studies.

Keywords

Genetic Markers, China, Biometry, Black People, Chromosome Mapping, Genetic Variation, DNA, United States, White People, Black or African American, Blotting, Southern, Asian People, Gene Frequency, Ethnicity, Indians, North American, Humans, DNA Probes, Alleles, Cells, Cultured, Polymorphism, Restriction Fragment Length

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    78
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
78
Top 10%
Top 1%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!