4 ms·
>The state was still so suspicious of Fairchild that when she gave birth to another child, a court officer stood in the delivery room to witness an immediate DN
by josu 12y ago
>The state was still so suspicious of Fairchild that when she gave birth to another child, a court officer stood in the delivery room to witness an immediate DNA test.
If you go as far as that, why wouldn't you test mitochondrial DNA? Using Ocamm's razor myself, I will speculate that she wasn't able to get a very good lawyer.
- ronaldx 12y agoI see no reason why a mitochondrial DNA test would be helpful - your point is that the mitochondria are maternally inherited? 1. Mitochondrial DNA is less apt than regular DNA to accurately identify motherhood since it has a low mutation rate. 2. The mitochondria would still come from the chimeric cells which still are a generation away from the mother's cells. 3. If you have have considered the possibility of chimerism, there are much simpler tests - e.g. the tests that they did do.
- josu 12y agoAFAIK -and please do correct me if I am wrong - twins have the same mitochondrial DNA, therefore even if she is a chimera all her cells should share the same mitochondrial DNA. And isn't testing for mitochondrial DNA fairly simple/cheap?
- ronaldx 12y agoMitochondrial DNA between twins is expected to be almost identical, but you and I also have extremely similar mitochondria: since it doesn't recombine and rarely mutates. So, you have to get to a much deeper level to identify the differences. Even if it's now possible/cheap, that's a recent development. mtDNA is good for finding your (maternal) ancestral group, less so for your immediate relatives.