Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28934201›Full record

ReviewPLoS genetics2017

Forensic genetics and genomics: Much more than just a human affair.

Miguel Arenas, Filipe Pereira, Manuela Oliveira, Nadia Pinto, Alexandra M Lopes, Veronica Gomes, Angel Carracedo, Antonio Amorim

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PLoS genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Forensic microbiology and bite marks: a systematic review.The Journal of forensic odonto-stomatology · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. HOFE: an interactive forensic entomological database.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The Revolution of Animal Genomics in Forensic Sciences.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Miguel ArenasDepartment of Biochemistry, Genetics and Immunology, University of Vigo, Vigo, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0516-2717
Filipe PereiraInstituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde (i3S), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8950-1036
Manuela OliveiraInstituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde (i3S), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Nadia PintoInstituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde (i3S), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Alexandra M LopesInstituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde (i3S), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3539-2318
Veronica GomesInstituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde (i3S), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2815-6376
Angel CarracedoInstitute of Forensic Sciences Luis Concheiro, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Antonio AmorimInstituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde (i3S), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7518-6247

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While traditional forensic genetics has been oriented towards using human DNA in criminal investigation and civil court cases, it currently presents a much wider application range, including not only legal situations sensu stricto but also and, increasingly often, to preemptively avoid judicial processes. Despite some difficulties, current forensic genetics is progressively incorporating the analysis of nonhuman genetic material to a greater extent. The analysis of this material-including other animal species, plants, or microorganisms-is now broadly used, providing ancillary evidence in criminalistics in cases such as animal attacks, trafficking of species, bioterrorism and biocrimes, and identification of fraudulent food composition, among many others. Here, we explore how nonhuman forensic genetics is being revolutionized by the increasing variety of genetic markers, the establishment of faster, less error-burdened and cheaper sequencing technologies, and the emergence and improvement of models, methods, and bioinformatics facilities.

Indexed as

GenomicsAnimalsBacteriaComputational BiologyFood AnalysisForensic GeneticsGenetic MarkersHumansPlantsGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID28934201
PMCPMC5608170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.