Forensic Science International 141 (2004) 175–183

Announcement of population data

Allele frequencies of 15 STR loci of three main ethnic populations
in Singapore using an in-house marker panel
R.Y.Y. Yong, L.T. Aw, E.P.H. Yap*
Defence Medical & Environmental Research Institute, DSO National Laboratories, 27 Medical Drive, Singapore 117510, Singapore
Received 27 August 2003; received in revised form 5 January 2004; accepted 8 January 2004

Abstract

Allele frequency data for 15 Short Tandem Repeat (STR) loci was studied for the three main ethnic groups residing in
Singapore, namely Chinese, Malay and Indian. An in-house STR marker panel was employed, consisting all 13 tetranucleaotide
STR listed in CODIS (Combined DNA Index System, USA) and two pentanucleaotide STR, Penta D and Penta E. This
represents a comprehensive report for allele distribution in the Singapore population for these 15 microsatellite markers
commonly used in forensic science.
# 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: STR (short tandem repeats); Allele frequencies; Population data; Singapore

Population: Venous blood was obtained from randomly at 60 8C for 30 s and extension at 72 8C for 30 s on MJ
selected, unrelated Singapore Armed Forces personnel com- Research PTC200 (MJ Research, Waltham, MA, USA)
prising 184 Chinese, 161 Malay and 177 Indian individuals. thermal cycler. PowerPlexTM 16 System amplification
Samples were anonymised and the collection procedure kit (Promega, USA), AmpFLSTR1 ProfilerPlus cum
approved by DMRI Research Ethics Committee. AmpFLSTR1 Cofiler (Applied Biosystem, Foster City,
Extraction: Genomic DNA was extracted from 200 ml of USA) were performed according to manufacturer instruc-
whole blood using QIAamp DNA Mini Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, tions and the PCR were carried out in GeneAmp 9700
Germany). (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, USA).
Marker panel and PCR: Primers for 15 STR and one Genotyping: All PCR products were pooled and multi-
sexing marker were designed using Primer3 software (http:// plexed on an automated capillary electrophoresis sequencer
www-genome.wi.mit.edu/cgi-bin/primer/primer3_www.cgi) (MegaBACE 1000, Molecular Dynamics, Sunnyvale, USA).
based on published DNA sequences (Genbank). The primers Some initial fragment analysis work was also carried out on
were designed such that all the PCR products could be a slab gel sequencer (ABI 377, Applied Biosystems, Foster
multiplexed in one single electrophoresis run. One of each City, USA) for platform validation. Genotypes were ana-
primer pair was 50 -labeled with a fluorescent dye; either lysed with Genetic Profiler (version 1.5). Alleles were
6FAM, TET, or HEX. PCR was performed in a total of 10 ml determined by correlating allele sizes from MegaBACE with
for each STR primer pairs. The reaction contained 1 known alleles of DNA standards (9947, 9948 and K562), and
Amplitaq Gold buffer, 0.5U Amplitaq Gold polymerase also by using samples which were typed with both the in-
(Applied Biosystems, Foster City, USA), 1.5 mM MgCl2, house panel and the commercial PowerPlexTM 16 panel.
5 pmole of each primer, 1–10 ng of genomic DNA. A total of Samples typed with PowerPlexTM 16 were designated using
1.6 mg of BSA was also included in some primer pairs for allelic ladders supplied with the kit. These alleles provided a
better PCR specificity. Cycling condition were 12 min at reference for correlating the in-house panel allele sizes to
95 8C; 30 cycles of denaturation at 95 8C for 30 s, annealing standard allele nomenclature.
Results: See Tables 1–3.
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ65-64857206; Quality control: Commercial DNA standards 9947, 9948
fax: þ65-64857033. (Coriell Cell Repositories, NJ, USA), K562 (Promega, USA)
E-mail address: [email protected] (E.P.H. Yap). and an in-house study DNA sample were first genotyped on

0379-0738/$ – see front matter # 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.01.004
 176
Table 1
Allele frequencies for 15 STR loci in the Chinese Singaporean population

Allele D3S1358 TH01 D21S11 D18S51 Penta D D5S818 D13S317 D7S820 D16S539 CSF1PO Penta E vWA D8S1179 TPOX FGA
(N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184) (N ¼ 184)

5 – – – – – – – – – – 0.0435 – – – –
6 – 0.1196 – – – – – – – – – – – – –
7 – 0.2772 – – 0.0109 0.0245 0.0027 0.0027 – – – – – – –
8 – 0.0516 – – 0.0543 0.0027 0.3179 0.1114 – – 0.0027 – – 0.5353 –
9 – 0.4728 – – 0.3315 0.0924 0.1467 0.0435 0.2364 0.0353 0.0136 – – 0.1196 –

R.Y.Y. Yong et al. / Forensic Science International 141 (2004) 175–183

9.1 – – – – – – – 0.0082 – – – – – – –
9.3 – 0.0272 – – – – – – – – – – – – –
10 – 0.0489 – – 0.1005 0.1685 0.1739 0.1929 0.0924 0.2609 0.0380 – 0.1658 0.0190 –
11 – 0.0027 – – 0.1359 0.3342 0.1739 0.3641 0.3098 0.2473 0.1766 – 0.1495 0.3043 –
12 0.0027 – – 0.0489 0.1793 0.2038 0.1277 0.2391 0.2147 0.3614 0.1033 – 0.1359 0.0190 –
13 – – – 0.1875 0.1114 0.1603 0.0543 0.0353 0.1223 0.0761 0.0543 – 0.1766 0.0027 0.0027
14 0.0462 – – 0.1766 0.0707 0.0136 0.0027 0.0027 0.0245 0.0136 0.0761 0.2500 0.1766 – –
15 0.3370 – – 0.1902 0.0027 – – – – 0.0054 0.0815 0.0516 0.1359 – –
16 0.3234 – – 0.1413 0.0027 – – – – – 0.0734 0.1576 0.0516 – 0.0054
16.4 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
17 0.2092 – – 0.0734 – – – – – – 0.0625 0.2446 0.0082 – –
18 0.0761 – – 0.0707 – – – – – – 0.0842 0.1929 – – 0.0353
19 0.0054 – – 0.0408 – – – – – – 0.0679 0.0815 – – 0.0435
19.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
19.4 – – – – – – – – – – 0.0027 – – – –
20 – – – 0.0217 – – – – – – 0.0435 0.0163 – – 0.0625
21 – – – 0.0299 – – – – – – 0.0353 0.0054 – – 0.1141
21.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0054
22 – – – 0.0054 – – – – – – 0.0163 – – – 0.1712
22.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0027
23 – – – 0.0109 – – – – – – 0.0082 – – – 0.2092
23.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0082
24 – – – 0.0027 – – – – – – 0.0163 – – – 0.1549
24.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0109
25 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0842
25.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
26 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0652
26.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
27 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0136
28 – – 0.0516 – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0054
29 – – 0.2255 – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0054
29.2 – – 0.0027 – – – – – – – – – – – –
29.3 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
30 – – 0.2853 – – – – – – – – – – – –
30.2 – – 0.0082 – – – – – – – – – – – –
30.3 – – 0.0054 – – – – – – – – – – – –
31 – – 0.1223 – – – – – – – – – – – –
31.2 – – 0.0734 – – – – – – – – – – – –
32 – – 0.0380 – – – – – – – – – – – –
32.2 – – 0.1440 – – – – – – – – – – – –
33 – – 0.0027 – – – – – – – – – – – –
33.2 – – 0.0353 – – – – – – – – – – – –
34.2 – – 0.0054 – – – – – – – – – – – –
H(obs.) 0.717 0.685 0.853 0.864 0.837 0.832 0.750 0.766 0.783 0.766 0.897 0.826 0.859 0.560 0.875
H(exp.) 0.730 0.680 0.821 0.862 0.809 0.783 0.798 0.757 0.778 0.733 0.914 0.806 0.848 0.606 0.871

R.Y.Y. Yong et al. / Forensic Science International 141 (2004) 175–183

PIC 0.68 0.63 0.80 0.85 0.79 0.75 0.77 0.72 0.74 0.69 0.91 0.78 0.83 0.54 0.86
P 0.192 0.222 0.228 0.174 0.552 0.824 0.336 0.198 0.250 0.979 0.008 0.687 0.875 0.170 0.196
PD 0.877 0.839 0.938 0.961 0.934 0.917 0.930 0.898 0.912 0.881 0.980 0.930 0.955 0.782 0.964
PE 0.456 0.405 0.701 0.723 0.669 0.659 0.510 0.538 0.567 0.538 0.789 0.648 0.712 0.245 0.745
H(obs.), observed heterozygosity; H(exp.), expected heterozygosity; PIC, polymorphic information content; P, P-value of exact test; PD, power of discrimination; PE, power of exclusion.

177
 178
Table 2
Allele frequencies for 15 STR loci in the Malay Singaporean population

Allele D3S1358 TH01 D21S11 D18S51 Penta D D5S818 D13S317 D7S820 D16S539 CSF1PO Penta E vWA D8S1179 TPOX FGA
(N ¼ 157) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161) (N ¼ 161)

5 – – – – – – – – – – 0.0435 – – – –
6 – 0.1180 – – – – – – – – – – – – –
7 – 0.2484 – – 0.0124 0.0062 0.0031 0.0031 – – 0.0093 – – – –
8 – 0.1118 – – 0.0528 0.0062 0.2857 0.1988 0.0093 0.0031 – – – 0.5497 –
9 – 0.3944 – – 0.3851 0.0280 0.1273 0.0714 0.2174 0.0280 0.0248 – – 0.1366 –
9.1 – – – – – – – 0.0031 – – – – – – –

R.Y.Y. Yong et al. / Forensic Science International 141 (2004) 175–183

9.3 – 0.0621 – – – – – – – – – – – – –
10 – 0.0652 – – 0.1646 0.3230 0.1273 0.1646 0.1770 0.2391 0.0497 – 0.0963 0.0404 –
11 – – 0.0062 0.1025 0.2671 0.2919 0.3199 0.2795 0.3106 0.2391 – 0.1646 0.2609 –
12 – – – 0.0683 0.1801 0.2174 0.1180 0.1925 0.1801 0.3385 0.0963 – 0.0963 0.0093 –
13 0.0064 – – 0.1118 0.0714 0.1304 0.0435 0.0466 0.1242 0.0714 0.0745 – 0.1429 0.0031 –
14 0.0510 – – 0.1770 0.0217 0.0217 0.0031 – 0.0124 0.0093 0.0807 0.2143 0.1925 – –
15 0.2930 – – 0.2640 0.0093 – – – – – 0.0590 0.0528 0.1925 – –
16 0.3790 – – 0.1553 – – – – – – 0.0714 0.1677 0.0901 – 0.0031
16.4 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
17 0.2134 – – 0.0839 – – – – – – 0.0466 0.3075 0.0248 – 0.0062
18 0.0573 – – 0.0373 – – – – – – 0.0466 0.1491 – – 0.0062
19 – – – 0.0435 – – – – – – 0.0714 0.0932 – – 0.0528
19.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0031
19.4 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
20 – – – 0.0311 – – – – – – 0.0373 0.0124 – – 0.0497
21 – – – 0.0031 – – – – – – 0.0248 0.0031 – – 0.1460
21.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0186
22 – – – 0.0155 – – – – – – 0.0124 – – 0.1863
22.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0031
23 – – – 0.0031 – – – – – – 0.0031 – – – 0.2019
23.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0186
24 – – – – – – – – – – 0.0062 – – – 0.1429
24.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0062
25 – – – – – – – – – – 0.0031 – – – 0.0714
25.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0031
26 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0528
26.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0031
27 – – 0.0155 – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0248
28 – – 0.0652 – – – – – – – – – – – –
29 – – 0.1863 – – – – – – – – – – – –
29.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
29.3 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
30 – – 0.2484 – – – – – – – – – – – –
30.2 – – 0.0497 – – – – – – – – – – – –
30.3 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
31 – – 0.1025 – – – – – – – – – – – –
31.2 – – 0.0807 – – – – – – – – – – – –
32 – – 0.0435 – – – – – – – – – – – –
32.2 – – 0.1615 – – – – – – – – – – – –
33 – – 0.0031 – – – – – – – – – – – –
33.2 – – 0.0373 – – – – – – – – – – – –
34.2 – – 0.0062 – – – – – – – – – – – –
H(obs.) 0.643 0.720 0.826 0.814 0.783 0.776 0.764 0.783 0.770 0.671 0.876 0.752 0.826 0.646 0.857
H(exp.) 0.719 0.748 0.850 0.846 0.773 0.759 0.785 0.787 0.795 0.726 0.896 0.798 0.851 0.609 0.868
PIC 0.67 0.71 0.83 0.83 0.75 0.72 0.75 0.76 0.76 0.68 0.89 0.77 0.83 0.55 0.85

R.Y.Y. Yong et al. / Forensic Science International 141 (2004) 175–183

P 0.012 0.304 0.425 0.118 0.815 0.747 0.270 0.151 0.596 0.043 0.601 0.318 0.415 0.745 0.312
PD 0.871 0.899 0.958 0.956 0.917 0.898 0.917 0.919 0.925 0.876 0.977 0.929 0.956 0.787 0.964
PE 0.346 0.461 0.648 0.625 0.567 0.556 0.534 0.567 0.545 0.385 0.746 0.512 0.648 0.350 0.709
H(obs.), observed heterozygosity; H(exp.), expected heterozygosity; PIC, polymorphic information content; P, P-value of exact test; PD, power of discrimination; PE, power of exclusion.

179
 180
Table 3
Allele frequencies for 15 STR loci in the Indian Singaporean population

Allele D3S1358 TH01 D21S11 D18S51 Penta D D5S818 D13S317 D7S820 D16S539 CSF1PO Penta E vWA D8S1179 TPOX FGA
(N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 176) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177) (N ¼ 177)

5 – 0.0028 – – – – – – – – 0.0650 – – – –
6 – 0.2869 – – 0.0028 – – – – – – – – – –
7 – 0.1619 – – 0.0085 0.0028 0.0254 0.0367 0.0028 0.0028 0.0565 – – 0.0028 –
8 – 0.0881 – – 0.0339 0.0028 0.2090 0.2627 0.0734 0.0028 0.0085 – – 0.3362 –
9 – 0.3381 – – 0.2119 0.0424 0.1215 0.0678 0.1412 0.0226 0.0254 – 0.0028 0.1243 –
9.1 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

R.Y.Y. Yong et al. / Forensic Science International 141 (2004) 175–183

9.3 – 0.1023 – – – – – – – – – – – – –
10 – 0.0199 – 0.0141 0.2147 0.1186 0.0650 0.2232 0.1158 0.1412 0.0198 – 0.1751 0.1017 –
11 – – – 0.0169 0.2429 0.3390 0.2232 0.2599 0.3249 0.3164 0.1497 – 0.0819 0.3983 –
12 – – – 0.0452 0.1299 0.3164 0.2458 0.1356 0.2062 0.4379 0.0932 – 0.0819 0.0367 –
13 0.0056 – – 0.1102 0.0706 0.1582 0.0847 0.0141 0.1130 0.0706 0.0706 0.0085 0.1186 – –
14 0.0508 – – 0.2910 0.0565 0.0113 0.0254 – 0.0198 0.0056 0.0565 0.1667 0.2203 – –
15 0.3305 – – 0.1780 0.0226 0.0085 – – 0.0028 – 0.0932 0.0932 0.2373 – –
16 0.2966 – – 0.1441 0.0056 – – – – – 0.1271 0.1582 0.0621 – –
16.4 – – – – – – – – – – 0.0028 – – – –
17 0.1864 – – 0.0819 – – – – – – 0.1017 0.2571 0.0198 – 0.0085
18 0.1186 – – 0.0480 – – – – – – 0.0734 0.1751 – – 0.0028
19 0.0113 – – 0.0339 – – – – – – 0.0198 0.1384 – – 0.0621
19.2 0.0112 – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0028
19.4 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
20 – – – 0.0254 – – – – – – 0.0056 0.0028 – – 0.1412
21 – – – 0.0085 – – – – – – 0.0085 – – – 0.1864
21.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0113
22 – – – 0.0028 – – – – – – 0.0085 – – – 0.1356
22.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0113
23 – – – – – – – – – – 0.0056 – – – 0.1356
23.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0056
24 – – – – – – – – – – 0.0028 – – – 0.1412
24.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
25 – – – – – – – – – – 0.0056 – – – 0.1130
25.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
26 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0367
26.2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
27 – – 0.0056 – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0028
28 – – 0.1525 – – – – – – – – – – – 0.0028
29 – – 0.1610 – – – – – – – – – – – –
29.2 – – 0.0085 – – – – – – – – – – – –
29.3 – – 0.0028 – – – – – – – – – – – –
30 – – 0.2034 – – – – – – – – – – – –
30.2 – – 0.0141 – – – – – – – – – – – –
30.3 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
31 – – 0.0480 – – – – – – – – – – – –
31.2 – – 0.1525 – – – – – – – – – – – –
32 – – 0.0028 – – – – – – – – – – – –
32.2 – – 0.1695 – – – – – – – – – – – –
33 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
33.2 – – 0.0678 – – – – – – – – – – – –
34.2 – – 0.0113 – – – – – – – – – – – –
H(obs.) 0.780 0.790 0.802 0.825 0.780 0.785 0.836 0.791 0.825 0.706 0.938 0.831 0.814 0.706 0.847
H(exp.) 0.751 0.759 0.850 0.837 0.823 0.744 0.819 0.789 0.800 0.683 0.911 0.823 0.833 0.701 0.870
PIC 0.71 0.72 0.83 0.82 0.80 0.70 0.79 0.76 0.77 0.63 0.90 0.80 0.81 0.65 0.86

R.Y.Y. Yong et al. / Forensic Science International 141 (2004) 175–183

p 0.133 0.450 0.167 0.967 0.175 0.040 0.899 0.712 0.701 0.568 0.614 0.984 0.128 0.944 0.027
PD 0.889 0.897 0.957 0.956 0.942 0.879 0.938 0.920 0.929 0.839 0.980 0.941 0.947 0.863 0.963
PE 0.562 0.580 0.603 0.646 0.562 0.572 0.668 0.582 0.646 0.438 0.873 0.657 0.624 0.438 0.690
H(obs.), observed heterozygosity; H(exp.), expected heterozygosity; PIC, polymorphic information content; P, P-value of exact test; PD, power of discrimination; PE, power of exclusion.

181
182 R.Y.Y. Yong et al. / Forensic Science International 141 (2004) 175–183

ABI PRISM1 377 DNA Sequencer and MegaBACE 1000 to the most polymorphic in all three Singapore populations.
compare the in-house panel with both PowerPlexTM 16 and Other highly polymorphic markers included FGA, D18S51
AmpFLSTR1 ProfilerPlus cum AmpFLSTR1 Cofiler. and D21S11. TPOX showed the least Power of Discrimina-
Similar DNA profiles were obtained for all standards using tion between individuals in Chinese and Malay (PD ¼ 0:782
any of the three panels on both platforms. NIST (National and PD ¼ 0:787), while CSF1PO showed the lowest Power
Institute of Standards and Technology, USA) reference of Discrimination in Indian population to (PD¼0.839. These
standards SRM 2391A were tested with the in-house panel findings are in close agreement with similar populations in
on MegaBACE. Eighteen samples were genotyped twice South East Asia, Hong Kong, and India [8–16].
with the in-house panel to ensure result reproducibility and Some rare and microvariant alleles were observed in this
accuracy. A concordant study was also carried out; approxi- study. They included allele 9.1 of D7S820, 26.2 of FGA,
mately 12% of the DNA samples (65 samples comprising 25 29.3 & 30.3 of D21S11 and alleles 16.4, 19.4, 24 & 25 of
Chinese, 21 Malay and 19 Indian) typed with in-house panel Penta E. These alleles had been confirmed by retyping with
were re-genotyped with PowerPlexTM 16 using MegabACE Powerplex 16, and have been deposited in STRBase (http://
1000 for fragment analysis. All genotype results are in full www.cstl.nist.gov/biotech/strbase).
concordance. There was also participation in proficiency In conclusion, this work describes a new panel of primers
testing from Orchid Cellmark, USA. for 15 STR markers commonly employed in forensic
Analysis of data: Forensic statistical parameters were science. The primers were organised such that their PCR
performed using the software PowerStats (http://www.pro- products could be multiplexed and analysed on two types of
mega.com/geneticidtools/powerststs/). Possible divergence automated DNA sequencers in common use. A limited
from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium was tested by exact test concordance study using both the in-house panel and Power-
[1] based on 20,000 simulations. The computer programme plex 16 confirmed the reliability and accuracy of the in-
HWE-test was implemented by LN Teow and YY Teo (DSO house panel. This panel could be further improved to achieve
National Laboratories, Singapore), and is available at http:// multiplexing the PCR step. In its present form, it had proven
www.dbioinfo.org/. to be economical and effective in generating a population
Access to data: Through email from corresponding frequency database. This paper also presents a comprehen-
author. sive record of allele frequency distribution of all the 15
Other remarks: This study of allele distribution for the common forensic STRs for the Singapore populations. To
15 STR loci proved that they are equally polymorphic in the our knowledge this is the first report of Penta D and Penta E
three populations in Singapore, as in other world populations allele frequencies for the three ethnic populations (Chinese,
[2,3]. The expected heterozygosity (unbiased estimate) Malay and Indian) in South-East Asia. Besides serving as a
ranges from 0.607–0.917, 0.611–0.899 and 0.685–0.914 reference database for individual identification in Singapore,
for Chinese, Malay and Indian respectively. The average this database also has value for other population genetics and
expected heterozygosity (unbiased estimate) is 0.788, 0.792 diversity studies.
and 0.802 for Chinese, Malay and Indian respectively. This This paper follows the guidelines for publication of
suggests that the genetic diversity of all three races are population data requested by the journal [17].
comparable to each other, and is very similar to the European
populations, which have heterozygosity ranging from 0.768
to 0.817 [4]. Isolated inbreed populations such as Native Acknowledgements
Alaska populations generally have lower genetic diversity
with a range between 0.695 and 0.703 [5]. This study was funded by MINDEF, Project Reference
The combined random match probability (RMP) of the 15 Number D200101454. We will like to thank the staff from
STR reaches one in 1:0  1017 , one in 1:4  1017 and one in Joint Manpower Department, Ministry of Defence, Singa-
3:7  1017 for Chinese, Malay and Indian respectively. No pore, for their assistance in collecting blood samples.
markers demonstrated significant deviation from Hardy–
Weinberg equilibrium using the exact test initially and after
correcting for multiple testing by Bonferroni correction [6]. References
Also a y-value may be employed to compensate for any
effect of population substructure, as recommended by the [1] S.W. Guo, E.A. Thompson, Performing the exact test of
National Research Council II Report [7]. Hardy–Weinberg proportions for multiple alleles, Biometrics
48 (1992) 361–372.
In this study, the allele distribution for 13 STR was found
[2] R. Chakraborty, D.N. Stivers, B. Su, Y. Zhong, B. Budowle,
to be very similar to the reported data for similar ethnic
The utility of STR loci beyond human identification:
groups in Malaysia [8,9]. Allele distribution of two STR implications for the development of new DNA typing
(D21S11 and FGA) was also comparable to an earlier study systems, Electrophoresis 20 (1999) 1682–1696.
for Singapore populations [10]. This study provides addi- [3] B. Budowle, B. Shea, S. Niezgoda, R. Chakraborty, CODIS
tional information on the two pentanucleotide STR (Penta D STR loci data from 41 sample populations, J. Forensic Sci. 46
and Penta E). Amongst the 15 markers, Penta E shown to be (2000) 453–489.
 R.Y.Y. Yong et al. / Forensic Science International 141 (2004) 175–183 183

[4] B. Budowle, R. Chakraborty, Population variation at the base of nine tetrameric STR loci—D3S1358, vWA, FGA,
CODIS core short tandem repeat loci in Europeans, Leg. D8S1179, D21S11, D18S51, D5S818, D13S317 and D7S820
Med. 3 (2001) 29–33. in Thai population, Forensic Sci. Int. 119 (2001) 123–125.
[5] B. Budowle, A. Chidambaram, L. Strickland, C.W. Behem, [12] I. Shimada, B. Brinkmann, N.Q. Tuyen, C. Hohoff, Allele
G.M. Taft, R. Chakraborty, Population studies on three Native frequency data for 16 STR loci in the Vietnamese population,
Alaska population groups using STR loci, Forensic Sci. Int. Int. J. Leg. Med. 116 (2002) 246–248.
129 (2002) 51–59. [13] Y. Dobashi, A. Kido, N. Fujitani, R. Susukida, M. Oya,
[6] B.S. Weir, Multiple tests. In: Genetic Data Analysis, Sinauer Population data of nine STR loci, D3S1358, vWA, FGA,
Associates, Sunderland, MA, 1990, pp. 109–110. TH01, TPOX, CSF1PO, D5S818, D13S317 and D7S820 in
[7] National Research Council II Report, The Evaluation of Banglaadeshis and Indonesians, Forensic Sci. Int. 135 (2003)
Forensic Evidence, National Academy Press, Washington, 72–74.
DC, 1996. [14] M.Y. Law, K.Y. To, S.H. Ho, B.C.M. Pang, L.M. Wong, H.L.
[8] K.B. Lim, N.H. Jeevan, P. Jaya, M.I. Othman, Y.H. Lee, STR Wun, S.K. Yau, K.L. Chan, STR data for the PowerplexTM
data for the AmpFlSTR Profiler loci from the three main 16 loci for the Chinese population in Hong Kong, Forensic
ethnic population groups (Malay, Chinese and Indian) in Sci. Int. 129 (2002) 64–67.
Malaysia, Forensic Sci. Int. 119 (2001) 109–112. [15] S. Panneerchelvam, N. Vanaja, D. Baskar, V. Sivapriya, C.
[9] L.H. Seah, N.H. Jeevan, M.I. Othman, P. Jaya, Y.S. Ooi, P.C. Damodaran, Distribution of alleles of 12 STR loci in Tamil
Wong, S.S. Kee, STR data for the AmpFlSTR Identifier loci population (South India), Forensic Sci. Int. 119 (2001) 126–
in three ethnic groups (Malay, Chinese and Indian) of the 128.
Malaysia population. Forensic Sci. Int. (2003), in press. [16] R. Rajkumar, V.K. Kashyap, Distribution of alleles of 15 STR
[10] C.J. Fregeau, W.F. Tan-Siew, K.H. Yap, G.R. Carmody, S.T. loci of the PowerPlexTM 16 Multiplex system in four
Chow, R.M. Fourney, Population Genetics Characteristics of predominant population groups of South India, Forensic Sci.
the STR loci D21S11 and FGA in eight human populations, Int. 126 (2002) 173–177.
Human Biology 70 (1998) 813–844. [17] P. Lincoln, A. Carracedo, Publication of population data
[11] B. Rerkamnuaychoke, W. Chantratita, U. Jomsawat, J. of human polymoprphisms, Forensic Sci. Int. 110 (2000)
Thanakitgosate, T. Ruangvithayanon, P. Rojanasunan, Data- 3–5.