Dy, 985 (62.18 ) had CU while 599 (37.82 ) had NCU, and the ICF was estimated to be 0.0348 (Table 1). FC marriages were the highest in proportion and accounted for 80.61 (n=794) of the CU (Table 2). Accordingly, DFC, FCOR, and SC marriages accounted for 1.32 , 6.80 , and 11.27 respectively. On the other hand, NCU was observed to be 37.82 . Detailed distributions of marital unions with respect to various demographic parameters of husbands and wives are given here.Consanguinity in Bhimber, Azad Kashmir, PakistanJabeen N and Malik STable 1. Consanguineous and non-consanguineous marriages and Aviptadil biological activity inbreeding coefficient (F) with respect to various demographic parameters of recruited subjects Parameter Tehsil Bhimber Barnala Samahni Total 389 (63.05) 248 (54.63) 348 (67.84) 985 (62.18) 228 (36.95) 206 (45.37) 165 (32.16) 599 (37.82) 617 454 513 1,584 1.42 Reference 1.75 1.37 0.0348 0.0320 0.0371 0.0348 Consanguineous No. ( ) Non-consanguineous No. ( ) Total marriages No. Odds ratio Inbreeding coefficient (F)2=18.19; df.2, p=0.0001 (significant) Age interval (completed years) 16-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and above Ethnic origin (husband) Jatt Rajput Gujjar Mirza Malik Mughal Bains-Rajput Syed Butt Others (n<30)30 (75.00) 356 (64.26) 325 (63.85) 177 (62.32) 74 (52.48) 23 (41.07)10 (25.00) 198 (35.74) 184 (36.15) 107 (37.68) 67 (47.52) 33 (58.93)40 554 509 284 1414.30 2.58 2.53 2.37 1.58 Reference0.0441 0.0359 0.0349 0.0351 0.0311 0.2=20.67; df.5, p=0.0009 (significant) 454 (67.36) 131 (57.71) 113 (51.13) 112 (58.03) 35 (64.81) 33 (70.21) 35 (76.09) 23 (65.71) 16 (51.61) 33 (58.93) 220 (32.64) 96 (42.29) 108 (48.87) 81 (41.97) 19 (35.19) 14 (29.79) 11 (23.91) 12 (34.29) 15 (48.39) 23 (41.07) 674 227 221 193 54 47 46 35 31 56 1.97 1.30 Reference 1.32 1.76 2.25 3.04 1.83 1.02 1.37 0.0379 0.0318 0.0305 0.0324 0.0341 0.0419 0.0421 0.0326 0.0227 0.=29.64, df.9, p=0.0005 (significant) Mother tongue Punjabi Pahari Location Rural Peri-urban Urban637 (59.48) 348 (67.84)434 (40.52) 165 (32.16)1,071Reference 1.0.0336 0.=100.6, df.1, p<0.0001 (significant) 838 (62.03) 97 (63.82) 50 (61.73) 513 (37.97) 55 (36.18) 31 (38.27) 1,351 152 81 1.01 1.09 Reference 0.0371 0.0346 0.0336 Contd.304 JHPN=0.467, df.2, p=0.7918 (non-significant)Consanguinity in Bhimber, Azad Kashmir, PakistanJabeen N and Malik STable 1.--Contd. Parameter Family structure Nuclear family Extended family (all) One couple and grandparents More than one couple Extended/combined family Marriage arrangement Arranged traditionally Reciprocal/ watta-satta Self-arranged/ arranged love 856 (60.97) 9 (47.37) 120 (74.53) 548 (39.03) 10 (52.63) 41 (25.47) 1,404 19 161 1.74 Reference 3.25 0.0335 0.0434 0.0461 386 (56.68) 599 (66.33) 71 (66.98) 10 (62.50) 518 (66.33) 295 (43.32) 304 (33.67) 35 (33.02) 6 (37.50) 263 (33.67) 681 903 106 16 781 Reference 1.51 1.22 1.00 1.18 0.0314 0.0370 0.0308 0.0322 0.0379 Consanguineous No. ( ) Non-consanguineous No. ( ) Total marriages No. Odds ratio Inbreeding coefficient (F)2=19.12, df.3, p=0.0003 (significant)2=12.17, df.2, p=0.0023 (significant)Tehsil-wise distributionA total of 617 (38.95 ) subjects belonged to tehsil Bhimber, 454 (28.66 ) to Barnala, and 513 (32.39 ) to Samahni (Table 1). Individually in tehsils, CU ranged from 54.63 in Barnala to 67.84 in Samahni. The differences in the distribution of CU and NCU in three tehsils was statistically buy HIV-1 integrase inhibitor 2 significant (Table 1).and inbreeding coefficient were also the highest in Jatt (55.19 ; ICF=0.0379) (Table 1-2). O.Dy, 985 (62.18 ) had CU while 599 (37.82 ) had NCU, and the ICF was estimated to be 0.0348 (Table 1). FC marriages were the highest in proportion and accounted for 80.61 (n=794) of the CU (Table 2). Accordingly, DFC, FCOR, and SC marriages accounted for 1.32 , 6.80 , and 11.27 respectively. On the other hand, NCU was observed to be 37.82 . Detailed distributions of marital unions with respect to various demographic parameters of husbands and wives are given here.Consanguinity in Bhimber, Azad Kashmir, PakistanJabeen N and Malik STable 1. Consanguineous and non-consanguineous marriages and inbreeding coefficient (F) with respect to various demographic parameters of recruited subjects Parameter Tehsil Bhimber Barnala Samahni Total 389 (63.05) 248 (54.63) 348 (67.84) 985 (62.18) 228 (36.95) 206 (45.37) 165 (32.16) 599 (37.82) 617 454 513 1,584 1.42 Reference 1.75 1.37 0.0348 0.0320 0.0371 0.0348 Consanguineous No. ( ) Non-consanguineous No. ( ) Total marriages No. Odds ratio Inbreeding coefficient (F)2=18.19; df.2, p=0.0001 (significant) Age interval (completed years) 16-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and above Ethnic origin (husband) Jatt Rajput Gujjar Mirza Malik Mughal Bains-Rajput Syed Butt Others (n<30)30 (75.00) 356 (64.26) 325 (63.85) 177 (62.32) 74 (52.48) 23 (41.07)10 (25.00) 198 (35.74) 184 (36.15) 107 (37.68) 67 (47.52) 33 (58.93)40 554 509 284 1414.30 2.58 2.53 2.37 1.58 Reference0.0441 0.0359 0.0349 0.0351 0.0311 0.2=20.67; df.5, p=0.0009 (significant) 454 (67.36) 131 (57.71) 113 (51.13) 112 (58.03) 35 (64.81) 33 (70.21) 35 (76.09) 23 (65.71) 16 (51.61) 33 (58.93) 220 (32.64) 96 (42.29) 108 (48.87) 81 (41.97) 19 (35.19) 14 (29.79) 11 (23.91) 12 (34.29) 15 (48.39) 23 (41.07) 674 227 221 193 54 47 46 35 31 56 1.97 1.30 Reference 1.32 1.76 2.25 3.04 1.83 1.02 1.37 0.0379 0.0318 0.0305 0.0324 0.0341 0.0419 0.0421 0.0326 0.0227 0.=29.64, df.9, p=0.0005 (significant) Mother tongue Punjabi Pahari Location Rural Peri-urban Urban637 (59.48) 348 (67.84)434 (40.52) 165 (32.16)1,071Reference 1.0.0336 0.=100.6, df.1, p<0.0001 (significant) 838 (62.03) 97 (63.82) 50 (61.73) 513 (37.97) 55 (36.18) 31 (38.27) 1,351 152 81 1.01 1.09 Reference 0.0371 0.0346 0.0336 Contd.304 JHPN=0.467, df.2, p=0.7918 (non-significant)Consanguinity in Bhimber, Azad Kashmir, PakistanJabeen N and Malik STable 1.--Contd. Parameter Family structure Nuclear family Extended family (all) One couple and grandparents More than one couple Extended/combined family Marriage arrangement Arranged traditionally Reciprocal/ watta-satta Self-arranged/ arranged love 856 (60.97) 9 (47.37) 120 (74.53) 548 (39.03) 10 (52.63) 41 (25.47) 1,404 19 161 1.74 Reference 3.25 0.0335 0.0434 0.0461 386 (56.68) 599 (66.33) 71 (66.98) 10 (62.50) 518 (66.33) 295 (43.32) 304 (33.67) 35 (33.02) 6 (37.50) 263 (33.67) 681 903 106 16 781 Reference 1.51 1.22 1.00 1.18 0.0314 0.0370 0.0308 0.0322 0.0379 Consanguineous No. ( ) Non-consanguineous No. ( ) Total marriages No. Odds ratio Inbreeding coefficient (F)2=19.12, df.3, p=0.0003 (significant)2=12.17, df.2, p=0.0023 (significant)Tehsil-wise distributionA total of 617 (38.95 ) subjects belonged to tehsil Bhimber, 454 (28.66 ) to Barnala, and 513 (32.39 ) to Samahni (Table 1). Individually in tehsils, CU ranged from 54.63 in Barnala to 67.84 in Samahni. The differences in the distribution of CU and NCU in three tehsils was statistically significant (Table 1).and inbreeding coefficient were also the highest in Jatt (55.19 ; ICF=0.0379) (Table 1-2). O.