Resolving relationship tests that show ambiguous STR results using autosomal SNPs as supplementary markers

When using a standard battery of STRs for relationship testing a small proportion of analyses can give ambiguous results – where the claimed relationship cannot be confirmed by a high enough paternity index or excluded with fully incompatible genotypes. The majority of such cases arise from unknowingly testing a brother of the true father and observing only a small number of exclusions that can each be interpreted as one- or two-step mutations. Although adding extra STRs might resolve a proportion of cases, there are few properly validated extra STRs available, while the commonly added hypervariable SE33 locus is four times more mutable than average, increasing the risk of ambiguous results. We have found SNPs in large multiplexes are much more informative for both low initial probabilities or ambiguous exclusions and at the same time provide a more reliable genotyping approach for the highly degraded DNA encountered in many identification cases. Eight relationship cases are outlined where the addition of SNP data resolved analyses that had remained ambiguous even with extended STR typing. In addition we have made simulations to ascertain the frequency of failing to obtain exclusions or conclusive probabilities of paternity with different marker sets when a brother of the true father is tested. Results indicate that SNPs are statistically more efficient than STRs in resolving cases that distinguish first-degree relatives in deficient pedigrees.     

Killing the orphans

In the real world of human activity, the orphan is a tragicmetaphor: the child, bereft of parental love and support, isforced to make its own way in a harsh, unforgiving world. Theorphan stirs our deepest emotions, demands our sympathy and,in overcoming early handicaps, earns our respect and admiration.Not for nothing is the orphan a potent force in literature:famous orphans include the Dickensian Oliver Twist and DavidCopperfield, Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer, not     

Aesop With Variations: Civil Service Competency as A Case of German Tortoise and British Hare?

Among the most widely used stereotypes in the contemporary literature on public management reform is to portray German administrative policy as that of a slow-moving 'tortoise' in contrast to the fast-moving reform 'hare'. Taking civil service competency as a point of analysis, this article questions the validity of these widely held assumptions. It does so in three steps. Following a brief comparative narrative of competency initiatives in the German and British higher civil services, the article explores to what extent the observed 'Aesop with variation' pattern can be explained. It suggests that the variations can only to a limited extent be explained by 'civil service competency exceptionalism' and that there therefore seems to be something wrong with the way that Germany and the UK are conventionally categorized in the international public management reform literature.     

Cabinet Government in the Twentieth Century

This paper examines the main features of the cabinet system as it had emerged during the twentieth century, and which Jennings did so much to crystallize in his pioneering study on Cabinet Government. It then assesses the main changes that have occurred over successive administrations since the late 1970s, and concludes that even if cabinet government seemed to return in 1990 and 2003, it was without the cabinet system that had underpinned and made it effective in the past.