Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 24 references

A full mitogenome's frequency can be conservatively bounded using just its top-level haplogroup and one rare SNV.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 10:18 UTC pith:XJATHQKR

load-bearing objection The probability inequalities are correct and the estimator is genuinely new, but the reported LRs are plug-in estimates whose 'guaranteed conservative' property does not automatically transfer to casework. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2601.10464 v1 pith:XJATHQKR submitted 2026-01-15 stat.AP q-bio.GN

MitoFREQ: A Novel Approach for Mitogenome Frequency Estimation from Top-level Haplogroups and Single Nucleotide Variants

Mikkel Meyer Andersen , Nicole Huber , Kimberly S Andreaggi , T\'ora Oluffa Stenberg Olsen , Walther Parson , Charla Marshall This is my paper
classification stat.AP q-bio.GN MSC 62P1092D10
keywords mitogenomeforensic geneticslikelihood ratiopopulation frequencyhaplogroupsingle nucleotide variantmtDNAmatch probability
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

MitoFREQ is a method for estimating the population frequency of a whole mitochondrial genome when the exact sequence has no match in a reference database. It assigns the mitogenome to one of 30 top-level haplogroups and multiplies the haplogroup's frequency by the frequency of the profile's rarest SNV within that haplogroup, using publicly available data from HelixMTdb and gnomAD. The method is proven to give an upper bound on the true mitogenome frequency, hence a conservative likelihood ratio, and it is guaranteed to give a higher frequency estimate than would be obtained with a finer (more specific) haplogroup if such data existed. The authors also show that 227 selected positions are sufficient to infer the top-level haplogroup in 99.9% of tested mitogenomes, making the approach applicable to degraded or partial profiles. On high-quality forensic datasets and diverse GenBank sequences, the method yields likelihood ratios in the range of 100–100,000.

Core claim

Under the assumption that the top-level haplogroup (TLHG) is known with certainty for the mitogenome X, the paper proves that for any SNV k in the profile, P(mitogenome) = P(X, TLHG) ≤ P(X_k, TLHG) = P(TLHG)P(X_k | TLHG). Therefore LR = 1/[P(TLHG)P(X_k | TLHG)] is a conservative lower bound on the true weight of evidence. The paper further proves a monotonicity property: if H is a finer haplogroup contained in G (e.g., M1 within M), then P(H)P(X_k | H) ≤ P(G)P(X_k | G), so using the coarser TLHG cannot underestimate the true frequency as long as the TLHG assignment is correct. This makes the method a valid, conservative source of match probabilities even when only top-level haplogroup and SN

What carries the argument

The central identity is the nested inequality chain P(mitogenome) = P(X, TLHG) ≤ P(X_k, TLHG) = P(TLHG)P(X_k | TLHG), obtained by telescoping the joint probability and using the assumption P(TLHG | X) = 1. Combined with monotonicity of joint probabilities—P(H, X_k) ≤ P(G, X_k) whenever H ⊆ G—this guarantees that finer haplogrouping only increases the LR. The practical enabler is a panel of 227 mitogenome positions that reproduces top-level haplogroup calls from full-sequence data in 99.9% of tested cases, allowing the method to work on partial profiles.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the frequency of a SNV within a top-level haplogroup does not depend on geographic origin, so that frequencies from HelixMTdb and gnomAD can be applied to the case-relevant population; if this transfer fails for rare variants in an undersampled population, the claimed conservative upper bound can be violated and LRs could overstate evidence.

What would settle it

Take a set of mitogenomes from an undersampled population (e.g., a specific African ethnic group), compute P(TLHG)P(X_k | TLHG) from HelixMTdb/gnomAD for their rarest SNVs, and compare the product against the observed frequency of those mitogenomes in a population-matched reference database such as EMPOP's population-specific sets. If, for a substantial fraction of profiles, the computed product is smaller than the observed frequency, the conservativeness claim fails for that population.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Forensic laboratories can compute mitogenome match statistics without requiring a full-sequence match in EMPOP or similar databases, drawing instead on the much larger HelixMTdb and gnomAD resources.
  • The likelihood ratio obtained from MitoFREQ is a conservative lower bound on the true weight of evidence, so it will not overstate the support for a match as long as the underlying assumptions hold.
  • Because only 227 positions are needed for top-level haplogroup inference, the method extends to degraded or partial mtDNA profiles that cannot be fully sequenced.
  • The TLHG frequency can be replaced by any population-specific distribution (e.g., country-specific), while SNV frequencies can be pooled across HelixMTdb and gnomAD, making the method adaptable to case-relevant reference populations.
  • Using a finer haplogroup, when data become available, can only increase the LR, so current estimates are a lower bound on future, more refined estimates.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The method's conservativeness relative to finer haplogroups suggests a path for incremental improvement: as fine-haplogroup SNV frequency data accumulate, LRs can only increase, so MitoFREQ provides a durable ceiling on frequency estimates.
  • The 0.982 log-frequency correlation between HelixMTdb and gnomAD is dominated by common variants; the method operates on the rare tail, where cross-database agreement is more uncertain and where a population-matched test would be most informative.
  • For populations undersampled in HelixMTdb (e.g., some African lineages), the assumption that SNV frequencies transfer across geographic origin may break down; a concrete test would compare MitoFREQ estimates against observed frequencies in a population-matched reference set.
  • The framework could be extended to multiple SNVs under a conditional-independence assumption within a TLHG, potentially tightening the upper bound without requiring full mitogenome counts—an extension the paper leaves open.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proposes MitoFREQ, a method for estimating the population frequency of a whole mitogenome using only a top-level haplogroup (TLHG) assignment and the frequency of the rarest SNV within that TLHG. The central derivation (§2.3, Eq. 6) shows that, under the assumption P(TLHG|X)=1, P(mitogenome) ≤ P(TLHG)·P(X_k|TLHG) for any SNV k, so the likelihood ratio LR = 1/[P(TLHG)·P(X_k|TLHG)] is a conservative lower bound on the true weight of evidence. The paper further proves (§2.4, Eq. 8) that a finer haplogroup yields a frequency estimate no larger than a coarser one, provided the same data source is used. The method is implemented in an open-source R package, TLHG prediction is reduced to 227 positions with 99.9% rank-1/2 concordance, and SNV frequencies from HelixMTdb and gnomAD are compared (log-correlation 0.982). LR distributions are reported on GenBank, Swedish, and U.S. datasets and compared with Brenner's κ and CGGT estimators.

Significance. The mathematical inequalities in §2.3–2.4 are correct, and the finer-vs-coarser property (Eq. 8) is exact even for plug-in counts from a single sample. The 227-position TLHG panel and the open-source implementation are practical strengths, and the use of large public mitogenome databases is a useful direction for forensic genetics. However, the paper's headline guarantee of a conservative LR is derived for true probabilities, not for the plug-in estimates actually reported. The data-dependent selection of the rarest SNV and the geographic portability of within-TLHG SNV frequencies are load-bearing risks that are not resolved. The paper is potentially valuable but requires substantial revision before its central claim is supportable.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3, Eq. (6)–(7); §3.4, Table 4] The conservative bound is stated for true probabilities, but the implementation uses plug-in estimates P̂(TLHG) and P̂(X_k|TLHG) and selects the rarest SNV. The inequality does not automatically transfer to the reported LR. A concrete counterexample is in Table 4: for 'Large: Rare Africa L0' (count 1 in GenBank), the Helix plug-in LR is 195,983, i.e., p̂=5.1e-6, whereas the GenBank empirical frequency for that mitogenome is 1/61,295 ≈ 1.6e-5, so the reported LR exceeds the count-based LR by a factor of about 3.2. Thus the plug-in bound can be anti-conservative relative to an independent database. The paper should either apply a conservative adjustment (e.g., upper confidence bounds with a multiple-testing correction) or demonstrate empirically that the bound holds.
  2. [§4 Discussion; §3.2 Fig. 2] The assumption that P(X_k|TLHG) is independent of geographic origin, which the authors themselves flag as 'potentially an oversimplification,' is load-bearing. The 0.982 log-frequency correlation is computed over all shared SNVs and is dominated by common variants, whereas MitoFREQ operates in the rare tail where relative discrepancies are largest. If the case-relevant population is underrepresented in HelixMTdb or gnomAD, a variant common in that population can appear as a singleton in the database, making the LR anti-conservative. Population-specific within-TLHG validation is needed before the method can be considered robust for forensic use.
  3. [§3.3, Fig. 3] The comparison to Brenner's κ and CGGT estimators does not validate the conservative property. Agreement of average log10(LR) with these count estimators is not evidence that MitoFREQ's LRs are lower bounds on the true weight of evidence. The paper should directly validate the bound by checking, for the GenBank/US/SWE datasets, whether P̂(TLHG)P̂(X_k|TLHG) ≥ the observed frequency for each haplotype, rather than only reporting LR distributions.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§2.3, Eq. (5)] The assumption P(TLHG|X)=1 is not guaranteed in practice. The rank-1/2 concordance is 99.9%, so for about 0.1% of sequences the bound can fail. The paper should state that the method is intended for cases where TLHG assignment is unambiguous, or model the assignment uncertainty.
  2. [§3.4, Table 4] The rarest-SNV selection is data-dependent and no multiple-testing adjustment is mentioned. A brief statement that this is the minimum over the profile, and that the computed LR is therefore a plug-in minimum not a fixed choice, would help readability.
  3. [§3.2, Fig. 2] The horizontal line of points at high gnomAD frequency but variable Helix frequency is noted as possible errors. This should be discussed more explicitly, as it affects the reliability of pooled estimates and the rare-tail comparison.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular derivation; minor self-referential TLHG validation toolchain only.

full rationale

The central frequency claim is not circular. Eq. (6) derives P(mitogenome) <= P(TLHG)P(X_k|TLHG) from the telescoping identity P(X) = P(X,TLHG) <= P(X_k,TLHG) under P(TLHG|X)=1, and Eq. (8) is a monotonicity argument for H subset of G. These are elementary probability derivations with no fitted parameters and no use of MitoFREQ's own output. The plug-in estimates (Helix/gnomAD TLHG frequencies, within-TLHG SNV frequencies, rarest observed SNV) are statistical estimation choices that can be anti-conservative, as the skeptic notes, but that is a calibration/validity issue rather than a circular reduction. The paper itself flags the key assumption in Section 4: 'These analyses also rely on the assumption that the probability of a SNV within a given TLHG is independent of geographic origin. This is potentially an oversimplification.' It also notes in Section 2.1 that the HelixMTdb paper is not traditionally peer-reviewed. The only self-referential element is the TLHG toolchain: Section 2.2 uses EMPOP/SAM2 [13] and motifs from [14] by the present authors to select 227 positions, and Tables 1-2 measure 'concordance' as agreement between reduced-panel and full-mitogenome calls from the same SAM2 tool. This is an internal consistency check rather than an external ground-truth validation, but it is not load-bearing for the derivation of Eqs. (6)-(8), which hold for any TLHG assignment satisfying P(TLHG|X)=1. Thus no circular step is identified; the minor self-citation receives a low score of 2 but does not undermine the paper's central derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The method's core bound is parameter-free; what it depends on is the certainty of TLHG assignment (Eq. 5), the accuracy/representativeness of HelixMTdb and gnomAD, transferability of within-TLHG SNV frequencies across populations, and the tree (DAG) structure of haplogroups. No new entities (particles, forces, conserved quantities) are introduced, and no constants are fitted to make the derivation work.

free parameters (3)
  • TLHG prediction panel (227 positions) = 227 positions (Table S1)
    Hand-selected from 39 haplogroup motifs of ref [14] (same research group as this paper); panel composition determines the 99.0-99.9% concordance in Tables 1-2. This is a design choice validated, not fitted, on the test data.
  • Minimum SNV observation filter = >= 2 (global)
    Section 2.1: positions with variants observed fewer than twice globally are excluded, shaping the pool of selectable 'rarest SNVs' and hence the LR values; a modeling choice.
  • TLHG collapsing = L4+L5+L6 -> L4-6; R+B -> R/B
    Section 2.2: applied to increase within-group sample sizes and TLHG inference accuracy; changes the granularity of the frequency estimates.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption P(TLHG | X) = 1: the correct top-level haplogroup is assigned with certainty
    Eq. (5) in §2.3. Approximately validated by SAM2 concordance of 99.0-99.9%; for the remaining 0.1% the upper-bound property does not hold.
  • domain assumption HelixMTdb and gnomAD SNV frequencies accurately represent the target population's TLHG-specific variant frequencies
    §2.5 relies entirely on these databases; §2.1 notes HelixMTdb is not traditionally peer-reviewed, and §3.2 notes recurring errors may be present in gnomAD.
  • domain assumption Within-TLHG SNV frequency is independent of geographic origin
    Discussion §4: the authors call this 'potentially an oversimplification'; supported only by the 0.982 log-frequency correlation on 4,762 shared SNVs, a correlation dominated by common variants.
  • standard math The mtDNA haplogroup tree is a DAG with H ⊆ G implying P(H) ≤ P(G)
    §2.4 uses monotonicity of probabilities along the haplogroup tree; true for tree-structured haplogroups.
  • domain assumption Positions are homoplasmic single-base variants; indels and heteroplasmy can be ignored
    §2.1 filters indels and considers only homoplasmic SNVs observed at least twice; indels are prone to mutation/sequencing/alignment errors.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 17187 in / 20564 out tokens · 217992 ms · 2026-08-03T10:18:32.059854+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Lineage marker population frequencies can serve as one way to express evidential value in forensic genetics. However, for high-quality whole mitochondrial DNA genome sequences (mitogenomes), population data remain limited. In this paper, we offer a new method, MitoFREQ, for estimating the population frequencies of mitogenomes. MitoFREQ uses the mitogenome resources HelixMTdb and gnomAD, harbouring information from 195,983 and 56,406 mitogenomes, respectively. Neither HelixMTdb nor gnomAD can be queried directly for individual mitogenome frequencies, but offers single nucleotide variant (SNV) allele frequencies for each of 30 "top-level" haplogroups (TLHG). We propose using the HelixMTdb and gnomAD resources by classifying a given mitogenome within the TLHG scheme and subsequently using the frequency of its rarest SNV within that TLHG weighted by the TLHG frequency. We show that this method is guaranteed to provide a higher population frequency estimate than if a refined haplogroup and its SNV frequencies were used. Further, we show that top-level haplogrouping can be achieved by using only 227 specific positions for 99.9% of the tested mitogenomes, potentially making the method available for low-quality samples. The method was tested on two types of datasets: high-quality forensic reference datasets and a diverse collection of scrutinised mitogenomes from GenBank. This dual evaluation demonstrated that the approach is robust across both curated forensic data and broader population-level sequences. This method produced likelihood ratios in the range of 100-100,000, demonstrating its potential to strengthen the statistical evaluation of forensic mtDNA evidence. We have developed an open-source R package `mitofreq` that implements our method, including a Shiny app where custom TLHG frequencies can be supplied.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.10464 by Charla Marshall, Kimberly S Andreaggi, Mikkel Meyer Andersen, Nicole Huber, T\'ora Oluffa Stenberg Olsen, Walther Parson.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: An example of subdivisions’ effect on the LR. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Comparison of the SNV frequencies, 𝑝Helix and 𝑝gnomAD. Each point represents an alternative allele at a mitogenome position in a TLHG. The Pearson correlation of the log10 transformed SNV frequencies was 0.982. We only considered SNVs observed in both databases. 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Distribution of log10(𝐿𝑅) values using the smallest one from the rank 1 and rank 2 TLHG prediction and pooled SNV frequencies. The reference log10(𝐿𝑅)s for singletons are from the count estimators in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Summary statistics of 𝐿𝑅 distributions using the smallest one from the rank 1 and rank 2 TLHG prediction. The columns correspond to the datasets, and the rows correspond to the summary statistics. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M. M. Andersen, D. J. Balding, Assessing the Forensic Value of DNA Evidence from Y Chromosomes and Mitogenomes , Genes 12 (8) (2021) 1209. doi:10.3390/genes12081 209. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes12081209

    work page doi:10.3390/genes12081 2021

  2. [2]

    M. M. Andersen, D. J. Balding, How convincing is a matching Y-chromosome profile? , PLOS Genetics 13 (11) (2017) e1007028. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1007028. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1007028

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1007028 2017

  3. [3]

    M. M. Andersen, D. J. Balding, How many individuals share a mitochondrial genome? , PLOS Genetics 14 (11) (2018) e1007774. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1007774. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1007774

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1007774 2018

  4. [4]

    top-level

    C. H. Brenner, Fundamental problem of forensic mathematics – The evidential value of a rare haplotype , Forensic Science International: Genetics 4 (5) (2010) 281–291. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2009.10.013. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2009.10.013 16 Table S1: 227 positions used for “top-level” haplogroups (TLHG) prediction. Position Position Positio...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2009.10.013 2010

  5. [5]

    I. J. Good, The Population Frequencies of Species and the Estimation of Population Parameters, Biometrika 40 (3/4) (1953) 237. doi:10.2307/2333344. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2333344

    work page doi:10.2307/2333344 1953

  6. [6]

    Cereda, Impact of Model Choice on LR Assessment in Case of Rare Haplotype Match (Frequentist Approach), Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 44 (1) (2016) 230–248

    G. Cereda, Impact of Model Choice on LR Assessment in Case of Rare Haplotype Match (Frequentist Approach), Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 44 (1) (2016) 230–248. doi: 10.1111/sjos.12250. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sjos.12250

    work page doi:10.1111/sjos.12250 2016

  7. [7]

    M. M. Andersen, P. S. Eriksen, N. Morling, Weight of evidence of Y-STR matches computed with the discrete Laplace method: Impact of adding a suspect’s profile to a reference database , Forensic Science International: Genetics 64 (2023) 102839. doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2023.102839. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2023.102839

    arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Parson, A

    W. Parson, A. Dür, EMPOP – A forensic mtDNA database , Forensic Science Interna- tional: Genetics 1 (2) (2007) 88–92. doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2007.01.018. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2007.01.018

    work page doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2007.01.018 2007

  9. [9]

    Bolze, F

    A. Bolze, F. Mendez, S. White, F. Tanudjaja, M. Isaksson, R. Jiang, A. D. Rossi, E. T. Cirulli, M. Rashkin, W. J. Metcalf, J. J. Grzymski, W. Lee, J. T. Lu, N. L. Washington, A catalog of homoplasmic and heteroplasmic mitochondrial DNA variants in humans (Oct. 2019). doi:10.1101/798264. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/798264

    work page doi:10.1101/798264 2019

  10. [10]

    K. M. Laricchia, N. J. Lake, N. A. Watts, M. Shand, A. Haessly, L. Gauthier, D. Ben- jamin, E. Banks, J. Soto, K. Garimella, J. Emery, H. L. Rehm, D. G. MacArthur, G. Tiao, M. Lek, V. K. Mootha, S. E. Calvo, Mitochondrial DNA variation across 56,434 individu- als in gnomAD , Genome Research 32 (3) (2022) 569–582. doi:10.1101/gr.276013.121. URL http://dx.d...

    work page doi:10.1101/gr.276013.121 2022

  11. [11]

    S. Chen, L. C. Francioli, J. K. Goodrich, R. L. Collins, M. Kanai, Q. Wang, J. Alföldi, N. A. Watts, C. Vittal, L. D. Gauthier, T. Poterba, M. W. Wilson, Y. Tarasova, W. Phu, R. Grant, M. T. Yohannes, Z. Koenig, Y. Farjoun, E. Banks, S. Donnelly, S. Gabriel, N. Gupta, S. Ferriera, C. Tolonen, S. Novod, L. Bergelson, D. Roazen, V. Ruano-Rubio, M. Covarrubi...

    2023

  12. [12]

    T. E. King, G. G. Fortes, P. Balaresque, M. G. Thomas, D. Balding, P. M. Delser, R. Neumann, W. Parson, M. Knapp, S. Walsh, L. Tonasso, J. Holt, M. Kayser, J. Appleby, P. Forster, D. Ekserdjian, M. Hofreiter, K. Schürer, Identification of the remains of King Richard III , Nature Communications 5 (1) (Dec. 2014). doi:10.1038/ncomms6631. URL http://dx.doi.o...

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms6631 2014

  13. [13]

    Huber, W

    N. Huber, W. Parson, A. Dür, Next generation database search algorithm for forensic mitogenome analyses , Forensic Science International: Genetics 37 (2018) 204–214. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.09.001. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.09.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.09.001 2018

  14. [14]

    A. Dür, N. Huber, W. Parson, Fine-Tuning Phylogenetic Alignment and Haplogrouping of mtDNA Sequences , International Journal of Molecular Sciences 22 (11) (2021) 5747. doi:10.3390/ijms22115747. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms22115747

    work page doi:10.3390/ijms22115747 2021

  15. [15]

    Huber, N

    N. Huber, N. Hurmer, A. Dür, W. Parson, mitoLEAF: mitochondrial DNA Lineage, Evolution, Annotation Framework, NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics 7 (2) (Mar. 2025). doi:10.1093/nargab/lqaf079. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nargab/lqaf079

    work page doi:10.1093/nargab/lqaf079 2025

  16. [16]

    C. R. Taylor, K. M. Kiesler, K. Sturk-Andreaggi, J. D. Ring, W. Parson, M. Schan- field, P. M. Vallone, C. Marshall, Platinum-Quality Mitogenome Haplotypes from United States Populations , Genes 11 (11) (2020) 1290. doi:10.3390/genes11111290. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes11111290 19

    work page doi:10.3390/genes11111290 2020

  17. [17]

    R. S. Just, M. K. Scheible, S. A. Fast, K. Sturk-Andreaggi, A. W. Röck, J. M. Bush, J. L. Higginbotham, M. A. Peck, J. D. Ring, G. E. Huber, C. Xavier, C. Strobl, E. A. Lyons, T. M. Diegoli, M. Bodner, L. Fendt, P. Kralj, S. Nagl, D. Niederwieser, B. Zimmermann, W. Parson, J. A. Irwin, Full mtGenome reference data: Development and characterization of 588 ...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.fsi 2015

  18. [18]

    Sturk-Andreaggi, M

    K. Sturk-Andreaggi, M. Bodner, J. D. Ring, A. Ameur, U. Gyllensten, W. Parson, C. Mar- shall, M. Allen, Complete Mitochondrial DNA Genome Variation in the Swedish Popu- lation, Genes 14 (11) (2023) 1989. doi:10.3390/genes14111989. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes14111989

    work page doi:10.3390/genes14111989 2023

  19. [19]

    Anderson, A

    S. Anderson, A. T. Bankier, B. G. Barrell, M. H. L. de Bruijn, A. R. Coulson, J. Drouin, I. C. Eperon, D. P. Nierlich, B. A. Roe, F. Sanger, P. H. Schreier, A. J. H. Smith, R. Staden, I. G. Young, Sequence and organization of the human mitochondrial genome , Nature 290 (5806) (1981) 457–465. doi:10.1038/290457a0. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/290457a0

    work page doi:10.1038/290457a0 1981

  20. [20]

    R. M. Andrews, I. Kubacka, P. F. Chinnery, R. N. Lightowlers, D. M. Turnbull, N. Howell, Reanalysis and revision of the Cambridge reference sequence for human mitochondrial DNA, Nature Genetics 23 (2) (1999) 147–147. doi:10.1038/13779. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/13779

    work page doi:10.1038/13779 1999

  21. [21]

    M. M. Andersen, J. Curran, J. de Zoete, D. Taylor, J. Buckleton, Modelling the depen- dence structure of Y-STR haplotypes using graphical models , Forensic Science Interna- tional: Genetics 37 (2018) 29–36. doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.07.014. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.07.014

    work page doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.07.014 2018

  22. [22]

    M. M. Andersen, A. Caliebe, K. Kirkeby, M. Knudsen, N. Vihrs, J. M. Curran, Estimation of Y haplotype frequencies with lower order dependencies , Forensic Science International: Genetics 46 (2020) 102214. doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.102214. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.102214

    arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Roewer, M

    L. Roewer, M. M. Andersen, J. Ballantyne, J. M. Butler, A. Caliebe, D. Corach, M. E. D’Amato, L. Gusmão, Y. Hou, P. de Knijff, W. Parson, M. Prinz, P. M. Schneider, D. Taylor, M. Vennemann, S. Willuweit, DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics (ISFG): Recommendations on the interpretation of Y-STR results in forensic analysis , Fo...

    arXiv 2020

  24. [24]

    Bright, M

    J. Bright, M. M. Andersen, D. Taylor, H. Kelly, M. Kruijver, J. Buckleton, Relevant propositions for Y chromosome interpretation , Journal of Forensic Sciences 70 (1) (2024) 271–275. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.15669. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.15669 20

    arXiv 2024