精斑中磷酸葡萄糖变位酶(PGM_1)及其亚型的电泳分型

本文用淀粉凝胶电泳法和 PAGIEF 对精斑 PGM_1普通型及亚型进行了检测。169份精液斑的 PGM_1分型结果是:PGM_1 1—1 87例;PGM_1 2—1 66例;PGM_1 2—2 16例,其中31例同一个体红细胞及精液 PGM_1分型的结果完全一致。研究了138例不同精子数精斑的 PGM_1型,发现精子数的多少对分型无影响。亚型检测结果与红细胞一样可分10型。     

应用窄范围两性电解质聚丙烯酰胺凝胶等电聚焦法检验人血痕中的Gc亚型

采用窄范围两性电解质聚丙烯酰胺凝胶等电聚焦加免疫吸印技术,对人血痕中 Gc 亚型进行分型,并调查了北京地区284名无关汉族群体的 Gc 亚型的分布及基因频率。结果显示:Gc~(IF)0.4287,Gc~(IS)0.2500.Gc~20.3222.观察值与期望值吻合度良好(ΣX~2=0.7530,P>0.80).Gc 的个人识别率为0.6507.且室温下保存7周的血痕可以准确判型。将调查结果与中国其它地区及国外不同人种 Gc 亚型的表型的分布与基因频率进行了比较,发现地理及人种间差异明显。     

成都地区汉族Gc亚型的分布及血痕中Gc亚型的检测

作者用免疫固定薄层聚丙烯酰胺凝胶等电聚焦(PAGIF)技术,调查了成都地区无关的125名健康汉族人血清Gc亚型分布。其6种亚型频率(%)分别为:Ge1F=20.8,Ge1S=8.0,Gc1F-1S=18.4,Gc2-1F=30.4,Gc2-1S=16.0和Gc2=6.4。Gc的基因频率为:Cc~(1F)=0.452,Gc~(1S)=0.252和Gc~2=0.296。对保存于室温条件下20周的陈旧血痕进行了Gc亚型定型,获得满意结果。     

血痕Tf亚型检测及北京地区基因频率分布调查

采用超薄层聚丙烯酰胺凝胶等电聚焦法对血痕Tf亚型进行分型,并调查北京地区223名无血缘关系汉族人群Tf亚型的分布。其基因频率:TfC~10.7354,TfC~20.2377 TfDchi 0.0269。经Hardy-Weinberg吻合度检验,观察值与期望值无显著性差异(ΣX~2=0.9905 df=3 p>0.50)。Tf的个人识别率为0.4020。非父排除率为0.1813。讨论了汉族群体Tf亚型及不同地区,不同人种间Tf分布的情况。到目前为止,室温下保存8个月的血痕仍可进行Tf亚型分型。对实验中质量的控制作了探讨,采用伏时控制电泳条件。     

血痕中类粘蛋白型(ORM)分型方法的研究及基因频率的调查

本研究应用聚丙烯酰胺凝胶等电聚焦加免疫固定技术对人血痕进行类粘蛋白型(ORM)分型,并调查了264名北京地区无血缘关系健康献血员ORM表现型,结果ORMl F1 48.9％;ORM1 F1S 37.5％;ORM1 F1F2 3.0％;ORM1 S 9.8％;ORM1 F2S 0.8％;经吻合度检验符合Hardy-Weinberg氏定律。其基因频率F1为0.6913;F2为0.2897;S为0.0189。电泳图谱清晰;分辨力好,可清楚地辨认F1、F2带;灵敏度高,检材用量仅5×2mm(血纱布);室温保存的血痕检材检出时间可长达一年半。     

阴道液与血液中PGM_1亚型、EsD、GLOI表型相关性的研究

本文用等电聚焦电泳法和琼脂糖淀粉混合凝胶电泳法,对阴道液、血液中的PGM_1亚型、EsD、GLOI表型进行了检测。在部分妇女的阴道液中未检出其本人血液中的这些酶型,测出的比例最高的是PGM_1亚型,EsD次之,GLOI最低。凡能显示清晰酶谱带的均与同一妇女血液中的表现型相同,未见不一致的现象。同时初步探讨了月经周期和性刺激对阴道液中PGM_1酶活性的影响。     

辽宁汉族人血清类粘蛋白(ORM)型的分布及其在血痕精液(斑)及脑脊液中的检出

本文作者采用PAGIEF结合免疫固定法,调查了辽宁汉族群体(431人)ORM的分布,检出了ORM1型和ORM2型各8种表现型;对不同条件下的血痕标本进行检测,成功地检出了37℃保存2年血痕的ORM1型;首次由脑脊髓液中检出了ORM1型。ORM型的总鉴别机率为0.7043,是进行个人识别和亲子鉴定的良好遗传标记。     

红细胞和血痕酸性磷酸酶(EAP)表型及广东人群EAP基因频率的调查

本文采用薄层聚丙烯酰胺凝胶等电聚焦电泳检测红细胞及血痕酸性磷酸酶表型,并对不同条件下的血痕标本进行检测,发现室温下(15～33℃)保存的110例纱布血痕7周内可全部正确分型,21例磁板血痕9周内均可正确分型;含血量≥5λl 的血痕可被正确检出 EAP 表型;日晒、水洗、发霉等因素可影响血痕 EAP 型的正确检出。同时调查了广东人群的 EAP 表型分布,基因频率为 p~a=0. 2338,p~b=0. 7662,发现 EAP 基因频率分布存在着地区差异。     

一次检测微量血痕的种属来源、ABO血型及红细胞酶EsD、PGM_1的表型

本文介绍一种一次检测微量血痕的种属来源、ABO 型、红细胞酶 EsD、PGM_1表型的方法。用盲法共测151份已知血痕种属来源 ABO 血型、EsD 与 PGM_1表型的血痕纤维,均能正确判型、吻合率为100％。     

微量血液及血痕的GPT、PGM1GLOI和EsD四种酶型的同时检出

近年来,国内对EsD、PGM_1、GLOI等酶型的检测已较普遍,GPT也已开始应用.Wraxall黄力力等报导了用琼脂糖和淀粉混合凝胶电泳对EsD,GLOI和PGM_1进行同步检测的方法.本文设计了一种将四种酶型同时检出的方法,现介绍如下:     

混合凝胶电泳法同步检测血液和血斑EsD、PGM_1及 GLOⅠ型的研究

本文采用1mm 厚的琼脂糖、水解淀粉混合凝胶电泳法同时分析血液及血斑 EsD、PGM_1及 GLOI 三种酶型。对室温下(20℃左右)保存的血痕其三种酶的活性进行了测定比较。并调查了北京地区222名健康献血员这三种酶的表型分布及基因频率。本文对实验中电泳的各个环节,条件及酶谱带显色的药量、时间,温度等条件的掌握控制也进行了实验比较。     

红细胞EsD和PGM_1的同步电泳分型及其在上海地区的分布与频率

用 pH7.4的 Tris-马来酸缓冲系统和混合淀粉凝胶同步检测血液及血癌中 EsD 和 PGM_1的表型,获得良好的分型效果。EsD 和 PGM_1的图谱区带平直、狭窄、清晰。各种表型之间差异著,极易区分容易发现稀有表型。我们在上海地区居民中检查了390人的 EsD 表型和724人的 PGM_1表型,其分布与其基因频率详见附表。在检测尸体血及尸体血痕时,发现一例尸体血和一例尸体血痕的 PGM 1活性明显增强,前者尚显现了一条额外的同工酶区带。     

改良磺基水杨酸法显示GC谱带及两个新的GC变异型的发现

本文采用改良了Kühnl报告的磺基水杨酸沉淀法显示GC谱带的技术,显示了六种常见的GC亚型和GC变异型。并且采用该法发现了两个新的GC变异型基因Gc~(1c3)和Gc~(2c7),其基因频率分別为0.0008和0.0004。本法经济、快速,谱带清晰,可取代需抗GC血清的常规免疫固定技术。     

广州人群红细胞GLOI表型的分布调查及血痕GLOI的检测

本文报道了广州地区人群的GLOI表型分布,基因频率为:GLOI~1=0.1716,GLOI~2=0.8284。室温下(25-30℃)保存的血痕20天内可全部正确分型;日晒8小时,露天过夜,4℃保存105天的血痕均可正确分型;流水冲洗2小时的血痕不能分型;室内腐败血标本9天内检测结果可靠。在实际应用时应考虑这些因素。     

中国(辽宁地区)汉族腮腺唾液中带快蛋白带慢蛋白和变异体蛋白型分布的研究

本文以浓缩的唾液为样本,用聚丙烯酰胺凝胶电泳的方法,调查了338名辽宁地区汉族人群的PmF、PmS和Ps型的分布。其基因频率为Ps~10.391、Ps~20.064、Ps°.545;PmF~+0.47、PmF~-0.53;PmS~+0.412、PmS~-0.588。按Hardy-Weinberg法则进行吻合度检验,Ps系统的观察值与期望值高度一致(0.975相似文献   

A NEW METHOD FOR STUDYING THE EXTENT,STABILITY, AND PREDICTORS OF INDIVIDUAL SPECIALIZATION IN VIOLENCE*

Specialization in violence is an important scientific and policy topic, and over the past several decades, many analysis techniques for studying specialization have emerged. Research in this area continues to be hampered, however, by remaining methodological problems. To overcome these problems, we propose a new method for studying specialization in violence based on an item‐response theory measurement approach that is implemented through a multilevel regression model. Our approach defines specialization as an individual level latent variable, takes into account the inherent confounds between specialization and overall level of offending, and gauges specialization relative to the population base rates of each offense. Our method also enables researchers to 1) estimate the extent and statistical significance of specialization, 2) assess the stability of specialization over time, and 3) relate specialization to explanatory variables. Using data from three studies, we found substantial levels of specialization in violence, considerable stability in specialization over time, and several significant and relatively consistent relationships of specialization to explanatory variables such as gender, parental education, and risk‐seeking.     

THE MEDIATOR'S ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY ISSUES AND CONCERNS (MASIC): A SCREENING INTERVIEW FOR INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE AND ABUSE AVAILABLE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN

Screening for intimate partner violence and/or abuse (IPV/A) in family mediation is important, perhaps particularly among cases without attorney representation. While most mediators agree that it is ideal to consider IPV/A in case planning, there is less agreement regarding the need to universally and systematically screen for IPV/A among all cases. Such attitudes are of concern, given research in other fields (e.g., medicine, couples therapy) and our own research in a family mediation clinic, which documents that the lack of consistent and formal IPV/A assessment results in underdetection of IPV/A. While a variety of IPV/A screening measures exist, each has shortcomings. Thus, our research and clinical experience led us to develop a new IPV/A screening measure, the Mediator's Assessment of Safety Issues and Concerns (MASIC). We discuss features of the MASIC and provide the full measure in the Appendix. The MASIC is a behaviorally specific IPV/A screen that assesses various types of abuse (e.g., coercive control, stalking, physical violence) over the course of the relationship and in the past year. It is administered as an interview to build rapport and assesses lethality indicators and offers optional recommendations for procedural changes in mediation based on IPV/A. Although we have begun relevant research, it is important to note that the MASIC has not yet been validated. Nonetheless, we recommend the use of systematic IPV/A screens in family mediation and suggest that such measures may prove especially important in providing unrepresented parties a safe and appropriate environment for mediation.