- Email: [email protected]
Corrigendum to “Comparison of Quantifiler® Trio and InnoQuant™ human DNA quantification kits for detection of DNA degradation in developed and aged fingerprints” [Forensic Sci. Int. 263C (2016) 132–138]
Forensic Science International 267 (2016) 228
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Forensic Science International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/forsciint
Corrigendum
Corrigendum to “Comparison of Quantifiler1 Trio and InnoQuantTM human DNA quantification kits for detection of DNA degradation in developed and aged fingerprints” [Forensic Sci. Int. 263C (2016) 132–138] Zachary C. Goeckera,* , Stephen E. Swiontekb , Akhlesh Lakhtakiab , Reena Roya a b
The Pennsylvania State University, Forensic Science Program, Eberly College of Science, University Park,PA 16802, USA The Pennsylvania State University, Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, University Park, PA 16802, USA
The authors would like to amend their concluding remarks. Instead of: “The Quantifiler1 Trio kits consistently produced higher degradation ratios than the InnoQuantTM kit, possibly due to the persistence of the short target throughout the duration of the exposure of the DNA to UV radiation”. The article should have stated: “The InnoQuantTM kit consistently produced higher degradation ratios than the Quantifiler1 Trio kit, possibly due to the persistence of the short target throughout the duration of the exposure of the DNA to UV radiation”. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.
DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.04.009 * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (Z.C. Goecker). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.07.003 0379-0738/ã 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Forensic Science International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/forsciint
Corrigendum
Corrigendum to “Comparison of Quantifiler1 Trio and InnoQuantTM human DNA quantification kits for detection of DNA degradation in developed and aged fingerprints” [Forensic Sci. Int. 263C (2016) 132–138] Zachary C. Goeckera,* , Stephen E. Swiontekb , Akhlesh Lakhtakiab , Reena Roya a b
The Pennsylvania State University, Forensic Science Program, Eberly College of Science, University Park,PA 16802, USA The Pennsylvania State University, Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, University Park, PA 16802, USA
The authors would like to amend their concluding remarks. Instead of: “The Quantifiler1 Trio kits consistently produced higher degradation ratios than the InnoQuantTM kit, possibly due to the persistence of the short target throughout the duration of the exposure of the DNA to UV radiation”. The article should have stated: “The InnoQuantTM kit consistently produced higher degradation ratios than the Quantifiler1 Trio kit, possibly due to the persistence of the short target throughout the duration of the exposure of the DNA to UV radiation”. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.
DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.04.009 * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (Z.C. Goecker). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.07.003 0379-0738/ã 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.