149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32687222)
1. Comparison of the M-Vac
McLamb JM; Adams LD; Kavlick MF
J Forensic Sci; 2020 Nov; 65(6):1828-1834. PubMed ID: 32687222
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Pulse Lavage System (PLS) versus forensic wet-vacuum collection of biological material.
Chaudhry HS; Kavlick MF
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2023 May; 64():102845. PubMed ID: 36780844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The use of the M-Vac® wet-vacuum system as a method for DNA recovery.
Vickar T; Bache K; Daniel B; Frascione N
Sci Justice; 2018 Jul; 58(4):282-286. PubMed ID: 29895461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The DNA-Buster: The evaluation of an alternative DNA recovery approach.
Währer J; Kehm S; Allen M; Brauer L; Eidam O; Seiberle I; Kron S; Scheurer E; Schulz I
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2023 May; 64():102830. PubMed ID: 36702080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of the microbial wet-vacuum system (M-Vac®) for DNA sampling from rough, porous substrates, and its compatibility with fully automated platforms.
Blackmore L; Hadley Cabral de Almada C; Poulsen F; Prasad E; Kotzander J; Paton K; Hitchcock C; Nadort A
Forensic Sci Int; 2024 May; 361():112079. PubMed ID: 38850613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effect of swabbing technique and duration on forensic DNA recovery.
Abdullah A; Szkuta B; Meakin GE
Sci Justice; 2023 May; 63(3):343-348. PubMed ID: 37169459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. DNA recovery from unfired and fired cartridge cases: A comparison of swabbing, tape lifting, vacuum filtration, and direct PCR.
Prasad E; Hitchcock C; Raymond J; Cole A; Barash M; Gunn P; McNevin D; van Oorschot RAH
Forensic Sci Int; 2020 Dec; 317():110507. PubMed ID: 32977300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The double-swab technique versus single swabs for human DNA recovery from various surfaces.
Hedman J; Jansson L; Akel Y; Wallmark N; Gutierrez Liljestrand R; Forsberg C; Ansell R
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 May; 46():102253. PubMed ID: 32007674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Increased recovery of touch DNA evidence using FTA paper compared to conventional collection methods.
Kirgiz IA; Calloway C
J Forensic Leg Med; 2017 Apr; 47():9-15. PubMed ID: 28171796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Recovery of salivary DNA from the skin after showering.
Williams S; Panacek E; Green W; Kanthaswamy S; Hopkins C; Calloway C
Forensic Sci Med Pathol; 2015 Mar; 11(1):29-34. PubMed ID: 25534825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of Isohelix™ and Rayon swabbing systems for touch DNA recovery from metal surfaces.
Bonsu DOM; Rodie M; Higgins D; Henry J; Austin JJ
Forensic Sci Med Pathol; 2021 Dec; 17(4):577-584. PubMed ID: 34674113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Sampling touch DNA from human skin following skin-to-skin contact in mock assault scenarios-A comparison of nine collection methods.
Kallupurackal V; Kummer S; Voegeli P; Kratzer A; Dørum G; Haas C; Hess S
J Forensic Sci; 2021 Sep; 66(5):1889-1900. PubMed ID: 33928655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Copan microFLOQ® Direct Swab collection of bloodstains, saliva, and semen on cotton cloth.
Sherier AJ; Kieser RE; Novroski NMM; Wendt FR; King JL; Woerner AE; Ambers A; Garofano P; Budowle B
Int J Legal Med; 2020 Jan; 134(1):45-54. PubMed ID: 31165261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Recovery of Trace DNA on Clothing: A Comparison of Mini-tape Lifting and Three Other Forensic Evidence Collection Techniques.
Hess S; Haas C
J Forensic Sci; 2017 Jan; 62(1):187-191. PubMed ID: 27864934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The influence of swabbing solutions on DNA recovery from touch samples.
Thomasma SM; Foran DR
J Forensic Sci; 2013 Mar; 58(2):465-9. PubMed ID: 23278347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The novel use of a spray-on rubber coating to recover cellular material from the surface of bricks.
Cahill MJ; Chapman B
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Nov; 49():102404. PubMed ID: 33038617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
