ArticleScientific reports2025
A novel approach for DNA extraction of white spot syndrome virus detection in penaeid shrimp.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 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
- Green and ultrafast nucleic acid extraction via sphere-mediated confinement ultrasonic grinding for sensitive foodborne pathogen detection.Ultrasonics sonochemistry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Penaeid shrimp and other aquatic crustaceans are highly susceptible to infection by the White Spot Syndrome Virus (WSSV). In recent years, genomic DNA extraction techniques have become central to many molecular diagnostics and technologies. DNA extraction kits were not included in the comparison because they often lack the flexibility and cost-effectiveness needed for large-scale applications in aquaculture research. This study introduces a novel Dimethyl Sulfoxide (DMSO)-based DNA extraction method that is simple, rapid, and equally sensitive, marking a unique advancement in aquaculture research. We used identical sample volumes to compare the DMSO-based method with the traditional phenol-chloroform and Guanidium Hydrochloride techniques. In the study, the DNA yield obtained using DMSO was 378.4 ng/µL, which was significantly higher compared to the other two extraction methods. The phenol-chloroform method yielded 267.8 ng/µL, while the GHCL method produced 151.2 ng/µL. The DMSO method has a lower detection limit and can detect DNA at concentrations as low as 10⁻⁹, whereas the GHCL and Phenol-Chloroform methods have detection limits of 10⁻⁷. These results suggest that DMSO provides a higher DNA yield and has a lower detection limit than the phenol-chloroform and GHCL methods, indicating its potential for more efficient DNA extraction. Therefore, our study introduces a high-quality genomic DNA extraction protocol applicable to the diagnosis of diseases in other marine organisms.
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.