ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2026
Improved DNA extraction from marine bones: A 15-year retrospective evaluation using an adapted Dabney extraction method.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExtracting DNA for the purpose of identification from bone material, especially for old samples or from extreme environmental conditions, has always been a challenging task in forensic genetics. At our forensic institute with two locations between the Baltic Sea and the North Sea, found marine bones are regularly submitted for evaluation and analyzed using molecular biology methods.
methodsAn improvement to commercially available bead-based methods routinely used for the bone investigations and often yielding poor or no DNA, was therefore aimed for. In the present study, an overview of all marine bones analyzed from the years 2009-2024 was conducted and samples - if possible - reanalyzed with a newly introduced adapted extraction method according to Dabney.
resultsA total of 82 bone finds have been examined over the last 15 years, 18 of which (22%) could eventually be re-examined using the adapted Dabney method. Morphologically, 61% of the bone finds were long tubular bones, followed by skulls and mandibular bones with both 13%. Compared to the North Sea bones, the Baltic Sea bones were better preserved on the outside, but showed increased adhesions of algae and barnacles. A comparison with the previously obtained molecular analysis results showed for the majority of the reanalyzed bones significantly higher DNA concentrations up to a 98-fold increase, enabling DNA profiling with an overall better quality (41% complete profiles compared to 12%).
conclusionThe reanalysis demonstrated that the adapted Dabney method extracts DNA from marine bones more effectively, and thus offers a superior alternative to a commonly used forensic extraction method.
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.