ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2026
Addressing species identification of 12 animals and human beings with two novel assays.
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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The strong interaction between animals and humans in life makes the application of animal DNA analysis increasingly valuable. To determine the species origin of biological samples from crime scenes, exclude extraneous samples and focus on key evidence, and to identify meat adulteration incidents in food markets, two novel systems were developed to address the issue in this study. Both systems allow simultaneous identification of human beings (Homo sapiens) and 12 common animal species (Canis lupus familiaris, Felis catus, Gallus gallus, Anas platyrhynchos, Bos taurus, Ovis aries, Sus scrofa, Oryctolagus cuniculus, Equus caballus, Micropterus salmoides, Columba livia, Mus musculus) based on species-specific short tandem repeats (STRs) and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), respectively. To validate the efficacy of the two systems in practical cases, we conducted a series of validation experiments on sensitivity, species specificity, mixture detection, and special case sample tests. Both were validated for the detection of blood, buccal swabs, tissue, and bloodstain samples. They showed good species specificity and are capable of identifying different species in mixed samples. They also have considerable detection rates for degraded samples after cooking and UV irradiation. Two systems provide more options for animal species identification based on the diversity and complexity of biological samples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40983711What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.