Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42154114›Full record

ArticleGenes & genomics2026

DNA purity over yield: optimizing extraction and PCR in degraded Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) fecal samples.

Supansa Rerkdee, Worapong Singchat, Thitipong Panthum, Trifan Budi, Warong Suksavate, Aingorn Chaiyes, Wichanon Saenphala, Kyudong Han, Prateep Duengkae, Kornsorn Srikulnath

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Genes & genomics, 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

10 authors.

Supansa Rerkdee *Special Research Unit for Wildlife Genomics (SRUWG), Department of Forest Biology, Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan, Chatuchak, Bangkok, 10900, Thailand.
Worapong Singchat *Special Research Unit for Wildlife Genomics (SRUWG), Department of Forest Biology, Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan, Chatuchak, Bangkok, 10900, Thailand.
Thitipong PanthumSpecial Research Unit for Wildlife Genomics (SRUWG), Department of Forest Biology, Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan, Chatuchak, Bangkok, 10900, Thailand.
Trifan BudiAnimal Genomics and Bioresource Research Unit (AGB Research Unit), Faculty of Science, Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan, Chatuchak, Bangkok, 10900, Thailand.
Warong SuksavateSpecial Research Unit for Wildlife Genomics (SRUWG), Department of Forest Biology, Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan, Chatuchak, Bangkok, 10900, Thailand.
Aingorn ChaiyesAnimal Genomics and Bioresource Research Unit (AGB Research Unit), Faculty of Science, Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan, Chatuchak, Bangkok, 10900, Thailand.
Wichanon SaenphalaDepartment of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation, Phu Khieo Wildlife Sanctuary, Chaiyaphum, Thailand.
Kyudong HanAnimal Genomics and Bioresource Research Unit (AGB Research Unit), Faculty of Science, Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan, Chatuchak, Bangkok, 10900, Thailand.
Prateep DuengkaeSpecial Research Unit for Wildlife Genomics (SRUWG), Department of Forest Biology, Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan, Chatuchak, Bangkok, 10900, Thailand. prateep.d@ku.ac.th.
Kornsorn SrikulnathSpecial Research Unit for Wildlife Genomics (SRUWG), Department of Forest Biology, Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan, Chatuchak, Bangkok, 10900, Thailand. kornsorn.s@ku.ac.th.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5985-7258

Funding

Institute for Advanced Studies, Kasetsart University FF(KU)45.67Institute for Advanced Studies, Kasetsart University KURDI 4.66International SciKU Branding (ISB), Faculty of Science, Kasetsart UniversityNational Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA) JRA-CO-2564-14003-THNational Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA) P-20-52605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNon-invasive genetic monitoring is essential for conserving the endangered Asian elephant (Elephas maximus). However, fecal DNA is highly susceptible to degradation and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) inhibition.

objectiveVarious DNA extraction techniques and optimized downstream PCR parameters were compared to establish a workflow that balances DNA quantity and quality.

methodsA modified phenol-chloroform-isoamyl alcohol (PCI) protocol was compared with a commercial extraction kit using 35 unpreserved, degraded fecal specimens to evaluate the trade-offs between DNA yield and purity.

resultsThe PCI method produced significantly higher concentrations (> 500 ng/µL in some samples) but poor purity ratios (A

conclusionThese findings demonstrate that DNA purity, rather than yield, is the critical determinant of PCR success in degraded wildlife samples, underscoring the importance of inhibitor-removal technologies for the reliable and effective management of endangered megafauna.

Indexed as

Conservation geneticsEnvironmental DNAKOD polymeraseNon-invasive geneticsPCR inhibition

Identifiers

PMID42154114

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.