Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 410

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples – a case study on DNA in faeces

Open access
Deagle, Bruce E, Eveson, J Paige, Jarman, Simon N·2006·Frontiers in Zoology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Poorly preserved biological tissues have become an important source of DNA for a wide range of zoological studies. Measuring the quality of DNA obtained from these samples is often desired; however, there are no widely used techniques available for quantifying damage in highly degraded DNA samples. We present a general method that can be used to determine the frequency of polymerase blocking DNA damage in specific gene-regions in such samples. The approach uses quantitative PCR to measure the amount of DNA present at several fragment sizes within a sample. According to a model of random degradation the amount of available template will decline exponentially with increasing fragment size in damaged samples, and the frequency of DNA damage (lambda) can be estimated by determining the rate of decline. RESULTS: The method is illustrated through the analysis of DNA extracted from sea lion faecal samples. Faeces contain a complex mixture of DNA from several sources and different components are expected to be differentially degraded. We estimated the frequency of DNA damage in both predator and prey DNA within individual faecal samples. The distribution of fragment lengths for each target fit well with the assumption of a random degradation process and, in keeping with our expectations, the estimated frequency of damage was always less in predator DNA than in prey DNA within the same sample (mean lambda(predator) = 0.0106 per nucleotide; mean lambda(prey) = 0.0176 per nucleotide). This study is the first to explicitly define the amount of template damage in any DNA extracted from faeces and the first to quantify the amount of predator and prey DNA present within individual faecal samples. CONCLUSION: We present an approach for characterizing mixed, highly degraded PCR templates such as those often encountered in ecological studies using non-invasive samples as a source of DNA, wildlife forensics investigations and ancient DNA research. This method will allow researchers to measure template quality in order to evaluate alternate sources of DNA, different methods of sample preservation and different DNA extraction protocols. The technique could also be applied to study the process of DNA decay.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1742-9994-3-11

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 410

Metadata

Authors
Deagle, B. E., Eveson, J. P., & Jarman, S. N.
Venue
Frontiers in Zoology
Published
2006-08-16
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
11-11
ISSN
1742-9994 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2124124158
Cited by
410
References
3
FWCI
11.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples – a case study on DNA in faeces. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1742-9994-3-11
The paper
Deagle, B. E., Eveson, J. P., & Jarman, S. N. (2006). Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples – a case study on DNA in faeces. Frontiers in Zoology. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-3-11

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.