MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177340637 · doi:10.1080/00085030.2021.1933811

Genetic study with autosomal STR markers in people of the Peruvian jungle for human identification purposes

2021· article· en· W3177340637 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carlos Neyra-Rivera, Edgardo Delgado Ramos, Fabiola Díaz-Soria, José Santos Quispe Ramírez, Jianye Ge, Bruce Budowle

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Society of Forensic Science Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicForensic and Genetic Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJunglePopulationGeographyAllele frequencyMicrosatelliteDemographyBiologyPopulation geneticsAlleleEvolutionary biologyGeneticsSociologyArchaeologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study allele frequencies and other population parameters were determined for forensically-relevant Short Tandem Repeat (STR) markers in 278 Peruvians born and resident in the Peruvian jungle in total and separated into the subpopulations Amazonas, Loreto, and Madre de Dios. The samples were analyzed using the VeriFilerTM Express kit which enables typing of 23 STR loci and an amelogenin marker for sex determination. The parameters assessed and reported herein were allele frequencies, the power of discrimination (PD), departures from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, and estimates of the population distances. Under the assumption of independence, when comparing the population of the Peruvian jungle with a Peruvian mestizo population, Aymara population of Peru, Ashaninca of Peru, Hispanic Americans, and a Bolivia mestizo population, the largest genetic distance (Fst) was with the Hispanic population (Fst = 0.0343), and the smallest was with the Peruvian mestizo population (Fst = 0.0126). The jungle subpopulation showed greater distances in some comparisons. This study provides population data from a unique population residing in the Peruvian jungle which could be used to estimate various statistics of forensic interest for human identification.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Society of Forensic Science JournalSame topicForensic and Genetic ResearchFrench-language works237,207