荧光标记STR复合扩增检验系统的研究

本研究以化学合成的荧光标记引物建立了STR复合扩增体系,体系I包括4个STR基因座和牙釉蛋白基因,体系Ⅱ包括4个STR基因座,体系Ⅲ包括3个STR基因座.制备了体系I各基因座的等位基因标准对照,测定了各等位基因长度.对代表性等位基因进行了序列测定,确定了等位基因重复单位的重复数目及测量长度与等位基因命名的对应关系,对各基因座等位基因进行了标准命名.建立了复合扩增检验系统等位基因自动分析命名的模板.三个复合扩增检验体系的累积随机匹配概率为8.3×10-3,为遗传学分析建立了实用的检验系统.     

低拷贝DNA模板检验方法探讨

目的探讨扩增及检测方法对低拷贝DNA模板分型检测灵敏度的影响。方法Control DNA 9947A按比例稀释,采用IdentifilerTM和DNATyper15TM试剂扩增,循环参数设置为28和28+6个循环,平行扩增3次,分别单独检测及3次合并检测,使用310及3130分析仪检测。结果28+6个循环的基因座检出率高于28个循环;等位基因不平衡及丢失与基因座没有特异性的关联,随着DNA模板量的减少,等位基因不平衡及丢失增多;将3次扩增产物混合后检测,等位基因不平衡及丢失情况减少,分型正确率增高。结论模板DNA分3次扩增后混合检测、循环数为28+6,可提高低拷贝模板基因座的检出率。     

15个基因座复合扩增体系的建立及新疆维吾尔族遗传多态性

目的建立15个基因座五色荧光复合扩增体系,并调查新疆维吾尔族的遗传多态性。方法筛选STR基因座,等位基因测序后按照重复序列重复次数命名,对建立的15个基因座五色荧光复合扩增体系进行灵敏度、种属特异性、同一性及稳定性检测,对新疆维吾尔族群体进行遗传多态性分析,与西藏藏族、岫岩满族、广州汉族进行群体间比较。结果建立了15个基因座复合扩增体系,检测灵敏度为0.3 ng,具有良好的种属特异性、同一性和稳定性。新疆维吾尔族13个常染色体STR基因座的基因频率分布符合Hardy-Weinberg平衡,无连锁不平衡现象,大部分基因座在群体间差异具有统计学意义。结论建立的体系具有法医物证学应用价值,13个常染色体STR基因座在新疆维吾尔族群体多态性高,适合于亲子鉴定及个人识别,可作为现有基因座的补充。     

15个常染色体和18个Y染色体STR基因座复合扩增检测体系及法医学应用

目的建立15个常染色体和18个Y染色体STR基因座以及性别基因座的六色荧光标记复合PCR直扩检测体系,并评估其法医学应用价值。方法采用六色荧光标记技术,建立15个常染色体STR基因座(D3S1358、D13S317、D7S820、D16S539、TPOX、TH01、D2S1338、CSF1PO、D19S433、v WA、D21S11、D18S51、D8S1179、D5S818、FGA)和18个Y染色体STR基因座(DYS527a/b、DYS448、DYS456、DYS385a/b、DYS458、DYS391、DYS390、DYS19、DYS438、DYS393、DYS389Ⅰ、DYS439、DYS389Ⅱ、DYS392、GATA、DYS635)以及Amelogenin的复合扩增体系,收集800份无关人员血样进行基因座检测,评估所建复合扩增体系的稳定性、灵敏度、种属特异性、直扩可行性以及抗抑制性。结果本检测体系对800份无关人员血样复合扩增后,结果准确,灵敏度达0.125ng;种属特异性高;38份案件检材全部准确分型。在对照男性与女性的DNA浓度比值大于等于1:4时,男性DNA的所有基因座均能准确分型。若模板DNA中含一定浓度的已知抑制剂时,所有基因座也均准确分型。结论本文建立的复合扩增检测体系可同时检测15个常染色体和18个Y染色体基因座以及性别基因座,结果稳定准确,灵敏度高,可为法医DNA检测分析提供一个新选择。     

17个STR基因座快速多重扩增体系的建立及应用

目的建立17个STR基因座多重PCR快速扩增体系。方法采用人血样本提取DNA并定量,用于多重快速扩增体系分型准确性检测;采用标准品9948,设定稀释度,检测体系灵敏度;采用定量男女DNA样本按11种比例混合,检测体系对混合样本的分型能力;在标准品中加入干扰物质血红素和腐植酸,检测体系的抗干扰能力;对5种非人样本进行检测,评价体系的特异性;对实际案例进行检验,评价体系实际应用价值。结果采用本文体系,在65min内,用0.5~2ng DNA模板量能获得较好的扩增效果,分型结果准确稳定,扩增均衡;种属特异性好;血红素≤50μmol/L,腐植酸≤25ng/μL时可不受干扰准确分型;男女混合样本中单一样本量不低于1/10即可进准确进行判断;对实际案例常见生物检材的检验结果良好。结论本文17个STR基因座快速多重扩增体系可显著缩短扩增时间,技术性能符合实际检案要求,可在实践中选用。     

多重置换扩增技术用于法医学微量DNA检测效果

目的探讨多重置换扩增(MDA)技术对法医学微量DNA样品STR检测分型的效果。方法用MDA技术对不同模板量DNA进行全基因组扩增(WGA),扩增产物用实时荧光定量PCR技术定量、用Profiler PlusTM试剂盒检测基因型。结果该方法可对模板DNA增加104～106倍。1ng样品DNA的MDA产物可获得9个STR基因座和Amelogenin性别基因座的准确分型结果;低于0.1ng的样品DNA经MDA扩增后,基因座检出数增加,但可见等位基因不平衡或丢失现象。结论MDA技术可有效增加DNA模板量和提高微量DNA分型效果。但样品DNA量低于0.1ng时,MDA产物的STR分型结果判读须慎重。     

快速PCR扩增体系的建立及法医学应用

目的建立快速PCR扩增体系,探讨其在法医实践中的应用价值。方法设置不同的缓冲液、酶浓度与Mg SO4浓度、热循环参数等,观察不同参数对扩增结果的影响,建立快速PCR扩增体系。使用该体系对常见检材进行STR分型,与常规方法扩增的结果比较,考察其分型准确性与扩增用时。结果本文建立的快速PCR扩增体系含DNA TyperTM19试剂盒的Primer Mix(5×)2μL;Ta KaRa试剂的Fast BufferⅡ(10×)1μL,Speed STARTMHS DNA Polymerase(5U/μL)0.3μL,Mg SO4(50mmol/L)为0.1μL。扩增程序为95℃120s;95℃2s、61℃15s,27个循环;72℃60s。结论快速PCR扩增体系分型结果准确,用时仅19min,缩短了常规扩增用时,有较大的法医学应用价值。     

SNP-STR遗传标记复合扩增体系的构建及法医学应用

目的筛选并构建与目前STR数据库兼容的SNP-STR遗传标记复合扩增体系,调查其在四川汉族群体中的遗传多态性,并探讨其在混合DNA样本分析中的应用价值。方法以现有商业试剂盒中使用的STR遗传标记为基础,筛选与STR遗传标记相邻的SNP位点并组成SNP-STR遗传标记。运用SNP等位基因设计特异性引物,构建基于等位基因特异性扩增的SNP-STR遗传标记复合扩增体系。调查该体系在四川汉族群体的遗传多态性,并评价不同位点数目的体系对两个体混合DNA样本的检测效能。结果筛选并构建了由13个SNP-STR遗传标记构成的等位基因特异性复合扩增体系。在四川汉族群体中,各位点杂合度为0.76～0.88,累积个体识别率达0.999 999 999 999 999 968。在对两个体混合DNA的分析中:单位点扩增时,混合样本的混合比例达到1 000∶1时依然可以检测到少量成分所特有的分型;多位点复合扩增时,混合比例最大可达500∶1;随着体系中位点数量的增加,对混合DNA中少量成分的检测效能降低。结论SNP-STR遗传标记较STR具有更高的多态性,其构成的复合扩增体系对混合样本的分析效能优于传统的STR复合扩增体系。     

多重置换扩增技术用于法医学微量DNA检测效果

目的探讨多重置换扩增（MDA）技术对法医学微量DNA样品STR检测分型的效果。方法用MDA技术对不同模板量DNA进行全基因组扩增（WGA）．扩增产物用实时荧光定量PCR技术定量、用Prrfiler Plus^TM试剂盒检测基因型。结果该方法可对模板DNA增加10^4～10^6倍。1ng样品DNA的MDA产物可获得9个STR基因座和Amelogenin性别基因座的准确分型结果；低于0．1ng的样品DNA经MDA扩增后，基因座检出数增加。但可见等位基因不平衡或丢失现象。结论MDA技术可有效增加DNA模板量和提高微量DNA分型效果。但样品DNA量低于0．1ng时，MDA产物的STR分型结果判读须慎重。     

模板DNA用量对荧光STR复合扩增检测的影响

目的 探讨模板DNA用量对荧光STR复合扩增检测的影响,寻求荧光STR复合扩增检测的最适扩增模板DNA用量。方法 采用模板DNA(9947A)不同的扩增用量,对Profiler Plus试剂盒的基因座进行扩增,在3100型全自动遗传分析仪上作了检测。结果 3100型遗传分析仪检测的最适扩增模板DNA用量在0.31～2.5ng之间。结论 模板DNA量过高或过低均会影响荧光STR复合扩增检测结果的可靠性。     

Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana on Avidyā

The concept of avidyā is one of the central categories in the Advaita of Śaṇkara and Maṇḍana. Shifting the focus from māyā, interpreted either as illusion or as the divine power, this concept brings ignorance to the forefront in describing duality and bondage. Although all Advaitins accept avidyā as a category, its scope and nature is interpreted in multiple ways. Key elements in Maṇḍana’s philosophy include the plurality of avidyā, individual selves as its substrate and the Brahman as its field (viṣaya), and the distinction in avidyā between non-apprehension and misapprehension. A closer investigation shows that Maṇḍana is directly influenced by Bhartṛhari’s linguistic non-dualism in developing the concept of avidyā. This study also compares other key constituents such as vivartta and pariṇāma that are relevant to the analysis of avidyā. As the concept of counter-image (pratibimba) emerges as a distinct stream of Advaita subsequent to Maṇḍana, this study also compares the application of pratibimba in the writings of Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana.     

Immigration,intermarriage and the changing face of Europe in the post war period

In this article we compare the propensity to intermarry of various migrant groups and their children who settled in Germany, France, England, Belgium and the Netherlands in the post-war period, using a wide range of available statistical data. We try to explain different intermarriage patterns within the framework of Alba and Nee's assimilation theory and pay special attention to the role of religion, colour and colonial background. We therefore compare colonial with non colonial migrants and within these categories between groups with ‘European’ (Christian) and non-European (Islam, Hinduism) religions. First of all, religion appears to be an important variable. Migrants whose faith has no tradition in Western Europe intermarry at a much lower rate than those whose religious backgrounds correspond with those that are common in the country of settlement. The rate of ethnic endogamous marriages in Western Europe are highest in Hindu and Muslim communities, often regardless if they came as guest workers or colonial migrants. Whereas differences in religion diminish the propensity to intermarry, colour or ‘racial’ differences on the other hand seem to be less important. This is largely explained by the pre-migration socialisation. Furthermore, the paper argues that the attention to institutions, as rightly advocated by Richard Alba and Victor Nee, needs a more refined and layered elaboration. Institutions, often as barriers to intermarriage, do not only emanate from the receiving society, but also—be it less formalized—within migrant communities. Especially religions and family systems, but also organized nationalist feelings, can have a profound influence on how migrants think about endogamy. Finally, strong pressures to assimilate, often through institutionalized forms of discrimination and stigmatization, not only produce isolation and frustrate assimilation (with resulting low intermarriage rates), but can also stimulate assimilation by 'passing' mechanisms. These factors, together with a more comparative perspective, are not completely ignored in the new assimilation theory, but—as this study of Western European intermarriage patterns stresses—deserve to be included more systematically in historical and social scientist analyses.     

Unraveling the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Kāvyaprakāśa</Emphasis>: Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa’s idiosyncratic sequence of topics in the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Candrāloka</Emphasis>

In his twelfth century alaṃkāraśāstra, the Candrāloka, Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa reverses the sequence of topics found in Mammaṭa’s Kāvyapr-akāśa, an earlier and immensely popular work. With such a structural revisionism, Jayadeva asserts the autonomy of his own work and puts forth an ambitious critique of earlier approaches to literary analysis. Jayadeva investigates the technical and aesthetic components of poetry in the first part of the Candrāloka, prior to his formal semantic investigations in the latter half of the text, thus suggesting that aesthetic evaluations of poetry beneficially inform scientific investigations of language. Jayadeva’s organization of his chapters on the semantic operations, moreover, intimates that the study of suggestive and metaphoric functions of language clarifies our understanding of denotation, which is conventionally understood to be the primary and direct path of verbal designation.     

Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington

Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakīrti’s texts. Huntington argues instead that mādhyamikas reject reasoning, distrust logic and do not offer arguments. He also argues that interpreters ought to recuse themselves from argument in order to be faithful to these texts. I demonstrate that he is wrong in all respects: Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti deploy arguments, take themselves to do so, and even if they did not, we would be wise to do so in commenting on their texts.     

Illumination,Imagination, Creativity: Rājaśekhara,Kuntaka, and Jagannātha on <Emphasis Type="Italic">Pratibhā</Emphasis>

Sanskrit poeticians make the visionary faculty of pratibhā a necessary part of the professional poet’s make-up. The term has a pre-history in Bhartṛhari’s linguistic metaphysics, where it is used to explain the unitary perception of meaning. This essay examines the relation between pratibhā and possible theories of the imagination, with a focus on three unusual theoreticians—Rājaśekhara, Kuntaka, and Jagannātha Paṇḍita. Rājaśekhara offers an analysis of pratibhā that is heavily interactive, requiring the discerning presence of the bhāvaka listener or critic; he also positions pratibhā in relation to Bildung (vyutpatti) and practice. For Kuntaka, pratibhā, never an ex nihilo creation by a poet, serves as the basis for the peculiar forms of intensified insight and experience that constitute poetry; these may also involve the creative scrambling and re-articulation of the object in terms of its systemic composition. At times, Kuntaka’s pratibhā comes close to a strong notion of imaginative process. But the full-fledged thematization of the imagination, and of pratibhā as its support and mechanism, is best seen in the seventeenth-century debates preserved for us by Jagannātha. A link is suggested between the discourse of poetic imagination in Jagannātha and similar themes that turn up in Indo-Persian poets such as Bedil.     

Preventing Homelessness for System‐Involved Youth

Too many youth and young adults find themselves on the streets, couch‐surfing with friends, in emergency shelters or worse, after exiting the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. In some circumstances, youth have had court hearings until their exit from the legal system, but those hearings have not focused on long‐range plans of youth and emergencies youth may encounter. In other circumstances, there has been little or no planning prior to discharge, especially for young people who leave the juvenile justice system. Courts can and should prevent, alleviate or end youth homelessness for youth who appear before them through strategies that are enumerated in the recently‐passed NCJFCJ resolution. This article expounds on three of these strategies – coordinating transition and re‐entry plans, insisting on effective legal representation of youth, and utilizing sound judicial leadership. It also describes the concurrent efforts of the Coalition for Juvenile Justice and the American Bar Association's Homeless Youth Legal Network to remove legal barriers and improve outcomes for youth and young adults experiencing homelessness.     

Best practices for structuring a family court parenting plan evaluation under the 2022 AFCC Guidelines

Evaluation appointment orders provide enforceable scaffolding for conduct of family court parenting plan evaluations, and use of the evaluator's reports, feedback, file, and testimony. Unlike a contract, a stipulated or adjudicated appointment order is directly enforceable by the family court. It unambiguously positions the evaluator as the family court's appointee – answerable directly to the court and, in some jurisdictions, protected by quasi-judicial immunity from damages claims. A well-crafted appointment order governs the roles and expectations of the court, the evaluator, the parties, the lawyers, and the collateral witnesses. An appointment order mandates the legal duties, rights, powers, and responsibilities of the professionals, the parties, and the collateral witnesses. At minimum, an appointment order articulates the legal basis for the appointment, the purpose and scope of the evaluation, compensation of evaluator, and the duty of the parties to participate in the process. A written evaluation protocol or procedures statement discloses in advance the methods of investigation and assessment that the evaluator intends to use. Together, the appointment order and written protocol help the evaluator, lawyers, parents, and judge manage the complexity of the evaluation process.     

The Supreme Array Scripture: A New Interpretation of the Title “Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra”

This article argues for a new interpretation of the Sanskrit compound gaṇḍa-vyūha as it is used in the common title of the Mahāyāna text the Gaṇḍavyūha-Sūtra.The author begins by providing a brief history of the sūtra’s appellations in Chinese and Tibetan sources. Next, the meanings of gaṇḍa (the problematic member of the compound) are explored. The author proposes that contemporary scholars have overlooked a meaning of gaṇḍa occurring in some compounds, wherein gaṇḍa can mean simply “great,” “big” or “massive.” This general sense is particularly common in the compound gaṇda-śaila (a “massive rock” or “boulder”) and is found in such texts as the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the Harivaṃśa and the Harṣacarita. Following the discussion of Gaṇḍa, the author examines the term vyūha (“array”) as it is used in the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra. The article concludes with the suggestion that a more appropriate translation of the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra would be “The Supreme array Scripture.”     

The Mūlāvidyā Controversy Among Advaita Vedāntins: was Śaṅkara Himself Responsible?

The concept of avidyā or ignorance is central to the Advaita Vedāntic position of Śȧnkara. The post-Śaṅkara Advaitins wrote sub-commentaries on the original texts of Śaṅkara with the intention of strengthening his views. Over the passage of time the views of these sub-commentators of Śaṅkara came to be regarded as representing the doctrine of Advaita particularly with regard to the concept of avidyā. Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, a scholar-monk of Holenarsipur, challenged the accepted tradition through the publication of his work Mūlāvidyānirāsaḥ, particularly with regard to the avidyādoctrine. It was his contention that the post-Śaṅkara commentators brought their own innovations particularly on the nature of avidyā. This was the idea of mūlāvidyā or ‘root ignorance’, a positive entity which is the material cause of the phenomenal world. Saraswati argues that such an idea of mūlāvidyā is not to be found in the bhāṣyas (commentaries) of Śaṅkara and is foisted upon Śaṅkara. This paper attempts to show that although Śaṅkara may not have explicitly favoured such a view of mūlāvidyā, his lack of clarity on the nature of avidyā left enough scope for the post-Śaṅkara commentators to take such a position on avidyā.     

Evaluation of six presumptive tests for blood, their specificity, sensitivity, and effect on high molecular-weight DNA

Luminol, leuchomalachite green, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, Hemident, and Bluestar are all used as presumptive tests for blood. In this study, the tests were subjected to dilute blood (from 1:10,000 to 1:10,000,000), many common household substance, and chemicals. Samples were tested for DNA to determine whether the presumptive tests damaged or destroyed DNA. The DNA loci tested were D2S1338 and D19S433. Leuchomalachite green had a sensitivity of 1:10,000, while the remaining tests were able to detect blood to a dilution of 1:100,000. Substances tested include saliva, semen, potato, tomato, tomato sauce, tomato sauce with meat, red onion, red kidney bean, horseradish, 0.1 M ascorbic acid, 5% bleach, 10% cupric sulfate, 10% ferric sulfate, and 10% nickel chloride. Of all the substances tested, not one of the household items reacted with every test; however, the chemicals did. DNA was recovered and amplified from luminol, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, and Bluestar, but not from leuchomalachite green or Hemident.