Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41359104›Full record

ArticleForensic toxicology2026

Identification of toxic plants from poisonous samples using massively parallel sequencing.

Hitomi S Kikkawa, Kouichiro Tsuge

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Forensic toxicology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Hitomi S KikkawaNational Research Institute of Police Science, 6-3-1 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, 277-0882, Chiba, Japan. kikkawa@nrips.go.jp.
Kouichiro TsugeNational Research Institute of Police Science, 6-3-1 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, 277-0882, Chiba, Japan.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 17K15886Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 20392269
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSome toxic plants have strong morphological similarities with edible wild plants. Therefore, poisoning often occurs due to accidental ingestion. It is important to identify poisonous plants in edible plant mixtures, even if the samples have been digested. In the present study, we developed a method for genus and species identification in mixed samples using massive parallel sequencing (MPS).

methodsVeratrum oxysepalum and Colchicum autumnale are the most common causative plants of such accidents and their morphological features are similar to those of the edible Hosta sieboldiana. In this study, we used V. oxysepalum and C. autumnale as the target poisonous plant species. We developed and optimized an MPS analysis method for trnL and rbcL regions that are commonly used in plant species identification. Initially, DNA from poisonous plants (V. oxysepalum and C. autumnale) and edible plants (H. sieboldiana) were mixed in various ratios and analyzed using MPS. Next, we prepared cooked materials and simulated gastric contents from V. oxysepalum, C. autumnale, and H. sieboldiana and analyzed them using MPS.

resultsWe detected both poisonous and edible plant DNA when mixed in equal amounts. Poisonous plants were also detected in cooked or simulated gastric acid content. These results suggest that our method can be used to identify the genera or species of plants present in cooked materials and simulated gastric contents.

conclusionsThese results indicate that MPS techniques are useful for the forensic analysis of plant materials.

Indexed as

DNA, PlantHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingPlants, EdiblePlants, ToxicHumansRibulose-Bisphosphate CarboxylaseDNA, PlantRibulose-Bisphosphate CarboxylaseColchicum autumnaleDNA barcodingForensic botanyMassively parallel sequencingPlant poisoningVeratrum oxysepalum

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.