Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigss.2009.08.098
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trace DNA collection—Performance of minitape and three different swabs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
41
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There is also a study by Hansson et al investigating DNA recovery techniques from clothing [6] which also considered flocked swabs as well as tape lifts. This study also indicated that tape lifts recovered more DNA from clothing than flocked swabs; thus supporting the findings of this study, albeit on a different surface type.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…There is also a study by Hansson et al investigating DNA recovery techniques from clothing [6] which also considered flocked swabs as well as tape lifts. This study also indicated that tape lifts recovered more DNA from clothing than flocked swabs; thus supporting the findings of this study, albeit on a different surface type.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This causes problems during the extraction phase as the swab itself is protecting the DNA from the detergent and proteinases. The flocked swabs overcome this by only having absorbent surfaces at the tip of each bristle, thus minimising any wicking effect and increasing the surface area for exposure to the proteinases [6].…”
Section: Flocked Swabsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Co-extraction of these swabs to enhance overall retrieval of DNA is recommended (Castella and Mangin, 2008;Pang and Cheung, 2007). The moistening agent can be sterile water, 0, 01% sodium dodecyl sulphate (Wickenheiser, 2002) or isopropanol (Hansson et al, 2009). The quantities of cellules retrieved depend also of the physical characteristics of the surface (Wickenheiser, 2002) and the use of different moistening agents for different surfaces may facilitate collection.…”
Section: Collecting Methodologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The quantities of cellules retrieved depend also of the physical characteristics of the surface (Wickenheiser, 2002) and the use of different moistening agents for different surfaces may facilitate collection. The quality of the swabs is also important, the quality should be DNA-free; cotton swabs are the most frequently used but other types such as foam may also be considered (Wickenheiser, 2002;Hansson et al, 2009;57, 111, 112). It has been shown that the yield of DNA from moist or frozen swabs are higher that from dried swabs.…”
Section: Collecting Methodologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various types of swabs and tape are used [84,[86][87][88][89]. Retrieval of DNA depends on the sampling force-e.g., the pressure and actuation of the swab and contact intensity of adhesives-at the targeted area of devices and body, but may only partially pick up the available sample.…”
Section: Collection Devices and Paraffin Embedded Tissuesmentioning
confidence: 99%