288 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24502761)
1. Swabs as DNA collection devices for sampling different biological materials from different substrates.
Verdon TJ; Mitchell RJ; van Oorschot RA
J Forensic Sci; 2014 Jul; 59(4):1080-9. PubMed ID: 24502761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The Extraction and Recovery Efficiency of Pure DNA for Different Types of Swabs.
Bruijns BB; Tiggelaar RM; Gardeniers H
J Forensic Sci; 2018 Sep; 63(5):1492-1499. PubMed ID: 29890011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Advantage of ForensiX Swabs in Retrieving and Preserving Biological Fluids.
Mawlood SK; Alrowaithi M; Watson N
J Forensic Sci; 2015 May; 60(3):686-9. PubMed ID: 25684353
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A comparison of DNA collection and retrieval from two swab types (cotton and nylon flocked swab) when processed using three QIAGEN extraction methods.
Brownlow RJ; Dagnall KE; Ames CE
J Forensic Sci; 2012 May; 57(3):713-7. PubMed ID: 22211626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Collaborative swab performance comparison and the impact of sampling solution volumes on DNA recovery.
Seiberle I; Währer J; Kron S; Flury K; Girardin M; Schocker A; Schulz I
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2022 Jul; 59():102716. PubMed ID: 35512614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Touch DNA collection - Performance of four different swabs.
Comte J; Baechler S; Gervaix J; Lock E; Milon MP; Delémont O; Castella V
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Nov; 43():102113. PubMed ID: 31525724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Nondestructive Biological Evidence Collection with Alternative Swabs and Adhesive Lifters.
Plaza DT; Mealy JL; Lane JN; Parsons MN; Bathrick AS; Slack DP
J Forensic Sci; 2016 Mar; 61(2):485-488. PubMed ID: 27404622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of methods to improve the extraction and recovery of DNA from cotton swabs for forensic analysis.
Adamowicz MS; Stasulli DM; Sobestanovich EM; Bille TW
PLoS One; 2014; 9(12):e116351. PubMed ID: 25549111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Study of criteria influencing the success rate of DNA swabs in operational conditions: A contribution to an evidence-based approach to crime scene investigation and triage.
Baechler S
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 Jan; 20():130-139. PubMed ID: 26590861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of DNA typing success in compromised blood and touch samples based on sampling swab composition.
Smith C; Cox JO; Rhodes C; Lewis C; Koroma M; Hudson BC; Dawson Cruz T; Seashols-Williams SJ
J Forensic Sci; 2021 Jul; 66(4):1427-1434. PubMed ID: 33624316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Visualising latent DNA on swabs.
Kanokwongnuwut P; Kirkbride P; Linacre A
Forensic Sci Int; 2018 Oct; 291():115-123. PubMed ID: 30195152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Direct PCR amplification of DNA from human bloodstains, saliva, and touch samples collected with microFLOQ
Ambers A; Wiley R; Novroski N; Budowle B
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Jan; 32():80-87. PubMed ID: 29126000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. PE-Swab Direct STR Amplification of Forensic Touch DNA Samples.
Liu JY
J Forensic Sci; 2015 May; 60(3):693-701. PubMed ID: 25684449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Enhanced forensic DNA recovery with appropriate swabs and optimized swabbing technique.
Hedman J; Akel Y; Jansson L; Hedell R; Wallmark N; Forsberg C; Ansell R
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2021 Jul; 53():102491. PubMed ID: 33774569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A holistic approach for the selection of forensic DNA swabs.
Comment D; Gouy A; Zingg C; Zieger M
Forensic Sci Int; 2023 Jul; 348():111737. PubMed ID: 37247525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Touch DNA recovery from vehicle surfaces using different swabs.
Giovanelli A; Grazinoli Garrido R; Rocha A; Hessab T
J Forensic Sci; 2022 Mar; 67(2):707-711. PubMed ID: 34725823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Contribution to the Development of Guidelines in the Analysis of Biological Evidence in Sexual Assault Investigations.
Ferreira-Silva B; Porto MJ; Magalhães T; Cainé L
J Forensic Sci; 2019 Mar; 64(2):534-538. PubMed ID: 30025166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Screening for cytomegalovirus shedding in vagina and saliva: Significant differences between biological fluids, swab types and storage durations in DNA recovery.
Tan NK; Pope CF; Carrington D
J Clin Virol; 2022 Jan; 146():105055. PubMed ID: 34953320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of tapelifting as a collection method for touch DNA.
Verdon TJ; Mitchell RJ; van Oorschot RA
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Jan; 8(1):179-86. PubMed ID: 24315606
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The Perfect Match: Assessment of Sample Collection Efficiency for Immunological and Molecular Findings in Different Types of Fabrics.
C Zapico S; Dytso A; Rubio L; Roca G
Int J Mol Sci; 2022 Sep; 23(18):. PubMed ID: 36142599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
