These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17487215)

  • 41. Power of exclusion for parentage verification and probability of match for identity in American Kennel Club breeds using 17 canine microsatellite markers.
    DeNise S; Johnston E; Halverson J; Marshall K; Rosenfeld D; McKenna S; Sharp T; Edwards J
    Anim Genet; 2004 Feb; 35(1):14-7. PubMed ID: 14731224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Analysis of microsatellites and parentage testing in saltwater crocodiles.
    Isberg SR; Chen Y; Barker SG; Moran C
    J Hered; 2004; 95(5):445-9. PubMed ID: 15388772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Molecular pedigree reconstruction and estimation of evolutionary parameters in a wild Atlantic salmon river system with incomplete sampling: a power analysis.
    Aykanat T; Johnston SE; Cotter D; Cross TF; Poole R; Prodőhl PA; Reed T; Rogan G; McGinnity P; Primmer CR
    BMC Evol Biol; 2014 Mar; 14(1):68. PubMed ID: 24684698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Genetic evaluation using parentage information from genetic markers.
    Dodds KG; Tate ML; Sise JA
    J Anim Sci; 2005 Oct; 83(10):2271-9. PubMed ID: 16160036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. An accurate formula to calculate exclusion power of marker sets in parentage assignment.
    Vandeputte M
    Genet Sel Evol; 2012 Dec; 44(1):36. PubMed ID: 23206351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. An international parentage and identification panel for the domestic cat (Felis catus).
    Lipinski MJ; Amigues Y; Blasi M; Broad TE; Cherbonnel C; Cho GJ; Corley S; Daftari P; Delattre DR; Dileanis S; Flynn JM; Grattapaglia D; Guthrie A; Harper C; Karttunen PL; Kimura H; Lewis GM; Longeri M; Meriaux JC; Morita M; Morrin-O'donnell RC; Niini T; Pedersen NC; Perrotta G; Polli M; Rittler S; Schubbert R; Strillacci MG; Van Haeringen H; Van Haeringen W; Lyons LA
    Anim Genet; 2007 Aug; 38(4):371-7. PubMed ID: 17655554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. A standardized microsatellite marker panel for parentage and kinship analyses in channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus.
    Waldbieser GC; Bosworth BG
    Anim Genet; 2013 Aug; 44(4):476-9. PubMed ID: 23216371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. How many markers are enough? Factors influencing parentage testing in different livestock populations.
    Strucken EM; Lee SH; Lee HK; Song KD; Gibson JP; Gondro C
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2016 Feb; 133(1):13-23. PubMed ID: 26234440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. An evaluation of the International Society for Animal Genetics recommended parentage and identification panel for the domestic pigeon (Columba livia domestica).
    de Groot M; van Haeringen WA
    Anim Genet; 2017 Aug; 48(4):431-435. PubMed ID: 28449233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Single nucleotide polymorphisms for pig identification and parentage exclusion.
    Rohrer GA; Freking BA; Nonneman D
    Anim Genet; 2007 Jun; 38(3):253-8. PubMed ID: 17433014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Pedigree and marker information requirements to monitor genetic variability.
    Baumung R; Sölkner J
    Genet Sel Evol; 2003; 35(4):369-83. PubMed ID: 12927072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Comparison of microsatellites and amplified fragment length polymorphism markers for parentage analysis.
    Gerber S; Mariette S; Streiff R; Bodénès C; Kremer A
    Mol Ecol; 2000 Aug; 9(8):1037-48. PubMed ID: 10964223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. APIS: An auto-adaptive parentage inference software that tolerates missing parents.
    Griot R; Allal F; Brard-Fudulea S; Morvezen R; Haffray P; Phocas F; Vandeputte M
    Mol Ecol Resour; 2020 Mar; 20(2):579-590. PubMed ID: 31609085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. An improvement on the maximum likelihood reconstruction of pedigrees from marker data.
    Wang J
    Heredity (Edinb); 2013 Aug; 111(2):165-74. PubMed ID: 23612692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Genetic diversity and assessment of 23 microsatellite markers for parentage testing of Santa Inês hair sheep in Brazil.
    Souza CA; Paiva SR; McManus CM; Azevedo HC; Mariante AS; Grattapaglia D
    Genet Mol Res; 2012 May; 11(2):1217-29. PubMed ID: 22614349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. The aunt and uncle effect revisited--the effect of biased parentage assignment on fitness estimation in a supplemented salmon population.
    Ford MJ; Williamson KS
    J Hered; 2010; 101(1):33-41. PubMed ID: 19666994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Informativeness of genetic markers for pairwise relationship and relatedness inference.
    Wang J
    Theor Popul Biol; 2006 Nov; 70(3):300-21. PubMed ID: 16388833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. A bioinformatic pipeline for identifying informative SNP panels for parentage assignment from RADseq data.
    Andrews KR; Adams JR; Cassirer EF; Plowright RK; Gardner C; Dwire M; Hohenlohe PA; Waits LP
    Mol Ecol Resour; 2018 Nov; 18(6):1263-1281. PubMed ID: 29870119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. On marker-based parentage verification via non-linear optimization.
    Boerner V
    Genet Sel Evol; 2017 Jun; 49(1):50. PubMed ID: 28619083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Pretense of parentage by siblings in immigration: Polesky's paradox reconsidered.
    Wenk RE; Shao A
    Transfusion; 2014 Feb; 54(2):456-60. PubMed ID: 23781888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.