Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39994870›Full record

ReviewAnimal genetics2025

Standards in wildlife forensic science, with a focus on non-human DNA analysis.

Greta J Frankham, Rob Ogden, Barry W Baker, Kyle M Ewart, Rebecca N Johnson, Irene Kuiper, Christina D Lindquist, M Katherine Moore, Arame Ndiaye, Lucy M I Webster

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Animal genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

10 authors.

Greta J FrankhamAustralian Museum Research Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0585-6700
Rob OgdenTRACE Wildlife Forensics Network, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2831-0428
Barry W BakerU.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Office of Law Enforcement, U.S. National Fish and Wildlife Forensic Laboratory, Ashland, Oregon, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7037-5682
Kyle M EwartAustralian Museum Research Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0871-3369
Rebecca N JohnsonNational Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3035-2827
Irene KuiperNetherlands Forensic Institute, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Christina D LindquistVeterinary Genetics Laboratory, University of California at Davis, Davis, California, USA.
M Katherine MooreUS National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Conservation Biology Division, Marine Forensic Laboratory, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7799-1760
Arame NdiayeAfrican Wildlife Forensics Network, Dakar, Senegal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9403-9130
Lucy M I WebsterWildlife DNA Forensic Unit, SASA, Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For genetic data to be used in forensic casework, it has to be produced within a controlled environment that follows strict quality standards. However, recent reviews have suggested that wildlife forensic laboratories are behind in the development and adherence to appropriate standards for casework. This paper will address these concerns by documenting the standards that have been produced, highlighting the systems of assessment and competency testing available, and reviewing the status of validated reference genetic databases. Networks of dedicated wildlife forensic scientists across the globe, represented in part by the author list for this paper, illustrate the strides taken to build capacity in this field, and an ongoing commitment to present quality wildlife forensic evidence in court.

Indexed as

Animals, WildDNAForensic GeneticsForensic SciencesAnimalsConservation of Natural ResourcesDNAaccreditationforensic standardsnon‐human DNAproficiencyquality assuranceSociety for Wildlife Forensic Sciencewildlife forensic science

Identifiers

PMID39994870
PMCPMC11850956

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.