AI Article Synopsis
- Cotton swabs are crucial for collecting biological evidence, but their effectiveness in retrieving DNA is influenced by factors like technique, DNA source, and moisteners used.
- The study explored various swab-moistening solutions such as buffers, detergents, and chelators to assess their impact on DNA recovery from different surfaces.
- Findings revealed that chelating agents (EGTA and EDTA) excelled at recovering DNA from blood and saliva, while water and detergents were better for collecting cell-free and cellular DNA from trace deposits.
Article Abstract
Cotton swabs are one of the most effective methods of retrieving biological evidence. The efficiency of swab-based DNA recovery is impacted by many factors, such as the swabbing technique, source of DNA and volume and type of wetting solution used to moisten the swab head. This study aimed to evaluate a series of different swab-moistening solutions. The types of swabbing solutions included buffers, detergent-based solutions, and chelating agents. The DNA deposits, including cell-free DNA, cellular DNA, blood, and saliva, were collected from three non-porous surfaces: plastic, glass, and metal. The difference in the performance of the swab-wetting solutions was heavily influenced by the type of biological fluid, with the chelating agents, EGTA and EDTA, being the most suitable for recovering DNA from saliva and blood samples. Conversely, water and detergent-based solutions were more appropriate for cell-free and cellular DNA material likely to be found in trace DNA deposits.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11399651 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100551 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!