ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2023
Development and application of a multiplex PCR system for forensic salivary identification.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A mitochondrial DNA metabarcoding system based on tNGS enables multiplex identification of vertebrate species in samples containing degraded and mixed DNA.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Machine learning-assisted analysis of saliva-containing mixtures using a saliva-specific multi-CpG-microhaplotype marker system.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Exploratory study on source identification of saliva stain and its TsD inference based on the microbial relative and absolute abundance.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In forensics, accurate identification of the origin of body fluids is essential for reconstructing a crime scene or presenting strong evidence in court. Microorganisms have demonstrated great potential in body fluid identification. We developed a multiplex PCR system for forensic salivary identification, which contains five types of bacteria:Streptococcus salivarius, Neisseria subflava, Streptococcus. mutans, Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron, and Bacteroides. uniformis. And the validated studies were carried out following the validation guidelines for DNA analysis methods developed by the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM), which included tests for sensitivity, species specificity, repeatability, stability, and mixed samples, trace samples, case samples, and a population study. Our result depicted that the lowest detection limit of the system was 0.01 ng template DNA. Moreover, the corresponding bacteria can still be detected when the amount of saliva input is low to 0.1 μL for DNA extraction. In addition, the target bacteria were not detected in the DNA of human, seven common animals, and seven bacteria DNA and in nine other body fluid samples (skin, semen, blood, menstrual blood, nasal mucus, sweat, tears, urine, and vaginal secretions). Six common inhibitors such as indigo, EDTA, hemoglobin, calcium ions, alcohol and humic acid were well tolerated by the system. What is more, the salivary identification system recognized the saliva component in all mixed samples and simulated case samples. Among 400 unrelated individuals from the Chinese Han population analyzed by this novel system, the detection rates of N. subflava, S. salivarius, and S. mutans were 97.75%, 70.75%, and 19.75%, respectively, with 100% identification of saliva. In conclusion, the salivary identification system has good sensitivity, specificity, stability, and accuracy, which can be a new effective tool for saliva identification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37127761What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.