科研成果
获奖成果
论文
专著
专利
现在位置:首页 > 科研成果 > 论文
论文
论文编号:
论文题目: The case for the continuing use of the revised Cambridge Reference Sequence (rCRS) and the standardization of notation in human mitochondrial DNA studies
作者: Hans-Jürgen Bandelt*; Anita Kloss-Brandst Atter; Martin B Richards; Yong-Gang Yao; Ian Logan
联系作者: bandelt@yahoo.com
外单位作者单位:
发表年度: 2014
卷: 59
期: 2
页码: 66-77
摘要: Since the determination in 1981 of the sequence of the human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) genome, the Cambridge Reference Sequence (CRS), has been used as the reference sequence to annotate mtDNA in molecular anthropology, forensic science and medical genetics. The CRS was eventually upgraded to the revised version (rCRS) in 1999. This reference sequence is a convenient device for recording mtDNA variation, although it has often been misunderstood as a wild-type (WT) or consensus sequence by medical geneticists. Recently, there has been a proposal to replace the rCRS with the so-called Reconstructed Sapiens Reference Sequence (RSRS). Even if it had been estimated accurately, the RSRS would be a cumbersome substitute for the rCRS, as the new proposal fuses-and thus confuses-the two distinct concepts of ancestral lineage and reference point for human mtDNA. Instead, we prefer to maintain the rCRS and to report mtDNA profiles by employing the hitherto predominant circumfix style. Tree diagrams could display mutations by using either the profile notation (in conventional short forms where appropriate) or in a root-upwards way with two suffixes indicating ancestral and derived nucleotides. This would guard against misunderstandings about reporting mtDNA variation. It is therefore neither necessary nor sensible to change the present reference sequence, the rCRS, in any way. The proposed switch to RSRS would inevitably lead to notational chaos, mistakes and misinterpretations.
刊物名称: Journal of Human Genetics
论文全文: 点击查看
全文链接: 点击下载
Email::
学科:
影响因子: 2.487 (2015)
第一作者所在部门:
论文出处:
论文类别:
参与作者: