ArticleGenes2024
Evaluation of Storage Conditions and the Effect on DNA from Forensic Evidence Objects Retrieved from Lake Water.
Article in Genes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Protocols and challenges in managing multi-source biological evidence at the crime scene: a scoping review.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
- CHARON: estimating the drift time and the number of individuals in environmental DNA with diploid individuals.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Article
- Impact of face-derived DNA on touch DNA deposition on cell phone screens.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- STR analysis of human DNA recovered from bathwater and other water samples for forensic identification.PloS one · 2026Article
- Review
- Enhancing trace DNA profile recovery in forensic casework using the amplicon RX post-PCR clean-up kit.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Forensic DNA analysis of heat-exposed unrestored teeth: Temperature and duration effects.Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
DNA analysis of traces from commonly found objects like knives, smartphones, tapes and garbage bags related to crime in aquatic environments is challenging for forensic DNA laboratories. The amount of recovered DNA may be affected by the water environment, time in the water, method for recovery, transport and storage routines of the objects before the objects arrive in the laboratory. The present study evaluated the effect of four storage conditions on the DNA retrieved from bloodstains, touch DNA, fingerprints and hairs, initially deposited on knives, smartphones, packing tapes, duct tapes and garbage bags, and submerged in lake water for three time periods. After retrieval, the objects were stored either through air-drying at room temperature, freezing at -30 °C, in nitrogen gas or in lake water. The results showed that the submersion time strongly influenced the amount and degradation of DNA, especially after the longest submersion time (21 days). A significant variation was observed in success for STR profiling, while mtDNA profiling was less affected by the submersion time interval and storage conditions. This study illustrates that retrieval from water as soon as possible and immediate storage through air-drying or freezing before DNA analysis is beneficial for the outcome of DNA profiling in crime scene investigations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.