ReviewGenes2025
Analysis of Human Degraded DNA in Forensic Genetics.
Review in Genes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Beyond the Core: The Role of Supplementary Short Tandem Repeats in Forensic Genetics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Recovery and analysis of ancient DNA: challenges, methods, and applications in forensic and archaeological science.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Screening of microhaplotypes for paternity testing from low-recombination regions in the human genome.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- Autosomal STR Markers for Forensic Genetics: Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.Genes · 2026Review
- Review
- Molecular analysis of time-dependent DNA and RNA degradation in bloodstains: differential stability of HBA and ALAS2 gene targets and its forensic implications.Molecular biology reports · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Upon an organism's death, enzymatic DNA repair ceases, exposing the genome to destructive factors such as free cellular nucleases and proliferating microorganisms, which can cause DNA loss. DNA preservation is highly dependent on environmental conditions, and less favorable environments accelerate degradation. Despite this, advanced extraction and analytical methods now enable the study of poorly preserved and degraded DNA. DNA typing is a foundation of forensic genomics, enabling the identification of individuals and the individualization of biological evidence through the generation of unique genetic profiles. Although DNA is relatively stable, environmental exposure initiates its degradation into progressively shorter fragments, complicating analysis. The extent of DNA preservation in biological evidence depends on numerous factors, and this review focuses on the environmental factors-including temperature, humidity, ultraviolet radiation, pH, chemical agents, and microbial activity-as the most influential variables. In samples with degraded DNA, the maximum amplicon length achievable through polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is inherently limited. This review discusses genetic markers and analytical strategies improvements that enable the examination of highly degraded samples, particularly when conventional short tandem repeat (STR) typing fails. In these situations, successful identification requires targeting short DNA fragments, which are more likely to persist. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are a valuable alternative, as their high allelic variability and short amplicon requirements make them more amenable to amplification from fragmented templates than STRs. Advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have further enhanced this capacity by enabling high-resolution SNP profiling, thereby improving outcomes in challenging forensic cases.
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.