Question

in what way is dna fingerprinting and traditional fingerprinting different? which statement is not true?

Answer 1

Wheres the other statements sir?

Answer 2

So DNA finger printing is kind of like DNA tracing. They (USA government) has a file of your DNA and they can use a sample of bio matter (your body) to trace who you are. FInger printing is kind of like using oil left behind to find what your finger looks like. SO: how are these different?

Answer 3

DNA 🧬 profiling is the most common way of deciding a singular's DNA attributes. DNA investigation planned to recognize an animal varieties, as opposed to an individual, is called DNA barcoding.

Answer 4

Answer choices (please post these next time)

Both types of fingerprints can often be easy to obtain from the crime scene.

Both are equally dependable and easy to do at any crime lab.

Both use traits that are unique to a given individual.

Both find a match using a computer to search a digital database

Answer 5

Both types of fingerprints can often be easy to obtain from the crime scene. ---> false, as physical fingerprints are actually pretty hard to find (fingerprints are often incomplete, not on the right surface type/texture, etc.)

Both are equally dependable and easy to do at any crime lab. ---> false, as traditional fingerprinting is not as reliable as DNA fingerprinting

Both use traits that are unique to a given individual. ---> true, as both fingerprints and DNA are unique to individuals (things get a little cloudy when it comes to twins, but let's not get into that right now)

Both find a match using a computer to search a digital database ---> false, as traditional fingerprinting, at least in its early days, did not use computer databases.