The subgenus Brevantennia, originally described by Sieder in 1953, comprises ten species of small psychid moths distributed across south-west and south-east Europe, extending northwards to the Alps and Carpathians. Prior to this revision, the presence of three species in Slovenia was recorded in the literature: Dahlica adriatica, Dahlica triglavensis, and Dahlica styriaca. However, the difficulty in accurately identifying specimens had led to numerous errors in both the scientific literature and public genetic databases. The current study confirms the presence of D. adriatica and D. triglavensis in Slovenia while excluding D. styriaca from the national checklist, a decision supported by the absence of verifiable specimens and the misattribution of historical records.

A major taxonomic outcome of the research is the establishment of Dahlica santicensis as a valid, distinct species. Previously, this taxon had been synonymized with D. styriaca by Arnscheid in 1988, a conclusion based on a lack of significant morphological differences observed at the time. The current authors demonstrate that D. santicensis is clearly separated from Styrian populations through both molecular and morphological evidence. Furthermore, the species Dahlica gorskikotarica, described by Weidlich in 2015 from Croatia, is synonymized with D. santicensis. This synonymy is supported by DNA barcoding data showing that specimens from the type locality of D. gorskikotarica fall within the same Barcode Index Number (BIN) as D. santicensis, alongside morphological similarities in forewing coloration and genital indices.

The identification of these species relies heavily on the genital index, a morphometric ratio calculated by dividing the length of the phallus by the length of the valva in male genitalia. This index, introduced by Sauter in 1956, proved to be the most useful diagnostic tool in the study, particularly when combined with the shape of the cloaking scales on the forewings. The researchers found that wing venation, previously used for classification, is an unreliable character at the species level due to high variability within populations. In contrast, the genital index provided consistent values that allowed for the clear differentiation of D. santicensis from other narrow-scaled species such as D. triglavensis and D. siederi, which share similar scale classes but differ in specific index ranges and wing patterns.

Field studies across four regions of Slovenia, including Gorenjska, Štajerska, Notranjska, and Dolenjska, revealed that D. santicensis is more widespread and adaptable than previously thought. The species was found in 22 localities, ranging from lowland valleys at 392 meters to subalpine slopes at 1600 meters. Unlike its close relative D. siederi, which prefers sunny subalpine cliffs above the tree line, D. santicensis inhabits shaded, humid areas of mixed forests dominated by conifers such as Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies. This eurytopic nature allows the species to thrive in diverse microclimates, from cold creek valleys to forest edges, provided the substrate consists of limestone or volcanic rock where larval cases can be securely attached.

Biological observations indicate that D. santicensis is univoltine, with adults emerging from late March to early May. Males become active in the early morning, shortly after females emerge, engaging in mating behaviors that can last up to ten minutes. The larvae construct small, rounded cases from finely chewed bark, soil, and sand, which they attach to tree trunks, rocks, or wooden structures. The study also documented the co-occurrence of D. santicensis with several other bagworm species, including Dahlica triquetrella and Taleporia tubulosa, highlighting the complex community structure of these microhabitats. The high genetic variability within D. santicensis, with a maximum intraspecific distance of 2.57 percent, suggests a dynamic population structure that may warrant further investigation into potential cryptic diversity.

In contrast, Dahlica triglavensis is a montane-alpine species restricted to rocky habitats in the Julian Alps and Karavanke mountains. The study revealed two distinct genetic lineages within this species, separated by the Sava valley, with one lineage in the Julian Alps and the other in the Karavanke. Despite this genetic divergence, no morphological differences were found between the populations, leading the authors to retain the single species name. D. triglavensis exhibits a mixed voltinism strategy, with some populations showing semivoltine behavior, likely a two-year cycle, which helps them persist in harsh alpine environments. Adults emerge after snowmelt, typically from June to July, and are active in the morning when the rocky slopes are illuminated by the first sunlight.

Dahlica adriatica, the third species confirmed in Slovenia, is distributed in the Dinaric Alps, with Slovenia marking the northern limit of its range. The species is well-represented in humid biotopes, including sunny, mossy rocks in cold valleys and Illyric Ostryo-Quercetum forest communities. The study updated the genital index values for D. adriatica, finding them slightly higher than previously reported, ranging from 0.61 to 0.68. The presence of D. adriatica in Slovenia has been confirmed since 1919, but its status was uncertain for decades due to misidentifications. The current research solidifies its place in the Slovenian fauna, providing detailed records of its habitat preferences and phenology.

The exclusion of Dahlica styriaca from the Slovenian checklist is a significant correction to the national lepidoptera fauna. Historical references to the species in Slovenia were traced back to a single source from 1992, with no verifiable locality or specimen material. Field visits to the suspected locality confirmed the presence of D. santicensis instead. D. styriaca is currently known only from specific localities in Austria, particularly in the Steiermark region. The distinction between D. styriaca and D. santicensis is now clear, with D. styriaca exhibiting a higher genital index and different distribution patterns. This clarification removes a long-standing error in the literature and provides a more accurate picture of the regional biodiversity.

This revision underscores the importance of integrating molecular tools with traditional morphological analysis in the taxonomy of difficult insect groups. The use of DNA barcoding helped resolve ambiguities that could not be addressed by morphology alone, particularly in the case of D. gorskikotarica and the genetic lineages of D. triglavensis. The study also highlights the value of comprehensive fieldwork in understanding the ecology and distribution of these species. By providing updated diagnostic keys and detailed descriptions, the research offers a reliable resource for future entomological studies in the region, ensuring that accurate identification can be achieved through a combination of genetic and morphological data.

Subject of Research: Systematics of Slovenian Dahlica Enderlein, 1912, subgenus Brevantennia Sieder, 1953 (Lepidoptera, Psychidae)

Article Title: Systematics of Slovenian Dahlica Enderlein, 1912, subgenus Brevantennia Sieder, 1953 ( Lepidoptera , Psychidae )

Article References: Rekelj, J., Predovnik, Ž., Huemer, P., & Lopez-Vaamonde, C. (2022). Systematics of Slovenian Dahlica Enderlein, 1912, subgenus Brevantennia Sieder, 1953 (Lepidoptera, Psychidae). Nota Lepidopterologica, 45, 207-232. https://doi.org/10.3897/nl.45.81674

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3897/nl.45.81674

Keywords: Systematics, Slovenian, Dahlica, Enderlein, subgenus, Brevantennia, Sieder, Lepidoptera, Psychidae, scientific research

The mystery centers on a single molecular substitution. In RNA, one of the four main building blocks is uracil, a pyrimidine base that pairs with adenine. When life transitioned to DNA, uracil was replaced by thymine, a methylated version of the same molecule. Chemically, the two bases are nearly identical, differing only by a single methyl group, so the substitution has long appeared redundant. What makes the change genuinely puzzling is that thymine is more susceptible to ultraviolet damage than uracil, at least by conventional measures. On the young Earth, before photosynthetic organisms built up a protective ozone layer, the surface was bathed in intense solar UV radiation. Choosing the more fragile base would seem to be an evolutionary blunder, and generations of scientists have asked why nature made such an unconventional choice.

To resolve the paradox, the Texas A&M team subjected thymine and uracil to controlled ultraviolet conditions designed to mimic the radiation environment of primordial Earth. Rather than relying on standard biochemical assays, they turned to biophotonics, an interdisciplinary field that applies light-based spectroscopic methods to biological molecules. Using absorption, fluorescence and Raman spectroscopy, the researchers tracked in real time how UV energy was absorbed, redistributed and dissipated within each base. This approach allowed them to observe not just whether the molecules were damaged, but precisely what form the damage took and how the excited molecules behaved in the instants after absorbing a photon.

The measurements revealed a striking difference between the two bases. Thymine, the team found, tends to channel UV damage into a more reversible form. Instead of allowing absorbed ultraviolet energy to break chemical bonds in ways that permanently corrupt the molecule, thymine funnels the excitation into pathways from which the molecule can recover. In other words, the base absorbs the harmful energy and then releases it in a way that leaves the genetic information intact. This behavior suggests that early genetic molecules may have survived intense sunlight not by avoiding damage altogether, but by controlling it and making it easier to self-repair.

Keyvan Khosh Abady, one of the research assistants on the project, described the finding in vivid terms. According to the team, thymine may have acted as a molecular sunscreen, absorbing harmful UV energy and keeping the damage confined to the genetic bases themselves rather than allowing it to spread to more vulnerable parts of the molecule. This interpretation reframes the UV vulnerability of thymine as a feature rather than a flaw. A base that soaks up radiation and converts it into a benign, recoverable form could protect the surrounding sugar-phosphate backbone and the delicate machinery of the early cell, effectively sacrificing itself in a controlled manner to shield the rest of the genetic system.

The implications of this microscopic discovery extend far beyond the question of how life began. Understanding how nucleobases dissipate ultraviolet energy informs a wide range of modern research areas, from radiation biology to astrobiology, where scientists assess whether genetic molecules could survive on planets with thin or absent ozone layers. The Texas A&M work provides quantitative spectral data on thymine and uracil under UV exposure, giving researchers a rigorous physical basis for modeling how the first genomes coped with radiation and for evaluating whether similar chemistry could operate on other worlds.

The team’s measurements also establish a new reference framework with immediate practical applications. The distinct spectral signatures they recorded for thymine and uracil could support faster and more sensitive pathogen detection, since the bases of microbial DNA and RNA produce characteristic optical responses that can be exploited for identification. The same signatures could be used to monitor whether UV disinfection systems have effectively inactivated microorganisms, a question of particular importance in water-treatment facilities where ultraviolet lamps are relied upon to render pathogens harmless. Khosh Abady noted that the framework could eventually underpin both detection and verification technologies, allowing operators to confirm in real time that disinfection doses have done their job.

For Rentzepis, whose career has spanned pioneering work in ultrafast spectroscopy and picosecond photography, the study represents a natural extension of light-based engineering methods into the origins of life. By treating the nucleobases as optical systems whose response to ultraviolet light can be measured and characterized with precision, the team has demonstrated how tools developed for photonics and electrical engineering can answer questions that conventional molecular biology approaches have struggled to settle. The interdisciplinary strategy highlights a growing trend in which engineers contribute decisive insights to fundamental problems in chemistry and evolutionary science.

The Texas A&M group is not stopping with the UV-shielding question. In future work, the researchers plan to move to an earlier stage of the origin-of-life process by investigating the forces that brought thymine, uracil and other components of early genetic systems together in the first place. A central goal is to determine whether life’s chemical building blocks formed and assembled entirely on Earth or whether some were delivered to the planet from elsewhere by meteorites and later incorporated into early genetic systems. Khosh Abady expressed gratitude to Texas A&M University and the research sponsors for supporting the work and enabling the team to explore such fundamental questions about life’s origins.

If the early findings hold up under continued scrutiny, the thymine paradox may come to be regarded as a textbook example of how evolution optimizes for survival under extreme conditions rather than for chemical elegance. A single methyl group, once dismissed as an inexplicable substitution, now appears to have been a deliberate molecular strategy that helped the first genomes weather the harshest sunlight our planet has ever known. The research, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences under DOI 10.1073/pnas.2615278123, offers a vivid reminder that the story of life on Earth was written in the language of light as much as in the language of chemistry, and that engineers armed with lasers and spectrometers are now fluent readers of that ancient text.

Subject of Research: Biophotonics study of why thymine replaced uracil in DNA under primordial UV radiation

Article Title: Electrical engineering research unlocks DNA mystery

Article References: Electrical engineering research unlocks DNA mystery. Original publication (Bibliographic details unavailable.)

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: Texas A&M University, thymine, uracil, DNA, biophotonics, UV radiation, molecular evolution, PNAS, origins of life, Rentzepis, Electrical, engineering

The story of Photo 51 has long been shadowed by a persistent narrative: that the image was shown, without Franklin’s knowledge, to James Watson in early 1953, and that Watson and Francis Crick then raced ahead to build their double-helical model while Franklin herself supposedly missed what her own photograph meant. Watson later wrote that seeing the photograph helped him and Crick develop their model. Subsequent accounts, however, often portrayed Franklin as having failed to grasp the importance of the image sitting in her own laboratory. The new research argues that this version of events does not hold up against the historical record.

To understand why, it helps to look at the technical details of how the photograph was made. In 1952, Franklin and her graduate student Raymond Gosling took Photo 51 at King’s College London by firing X-rays at DNA and recording the pattern created when the X-rays scattered from the molecules. The resulting X-shaped pattern of dark spots and smears was the signature of a helix: the regular, repeating arrangement of scattering units in a spiral produces exactly that kind of crossed pattern of reflections. The sharper and cleaner the pattern, the more precise the measurements that can be extracted from it, including the dimensions and geometry of the helix.

The crucial new insight concerns Photo 49, the earlier image that preceded Photo 51. Photo 49 contained a blemish caused by a component inside the X-ray camera slipping across the film and obscuring part of the image. Despite this defect, Franklin was able to extract useful information from the photograph and use it to determine key features of the structure of the DNA molecule. At that stage, she had not yet established exactly how many strands made up the DNA molecule, whether it was a single, double or triple helix. But the research shows that she already knew the X-ray pattern could provide important information about DNA’s helical structure, and that a better image would yield better answers.

That is precisely why Photo 51 exists. Rather than being an accidental or routine exposure, it was a deliberate, carefully planned attempt to produce a cleaner version of the pattern Franklin had already begun to interpret. The blemish on Photo 49 had degraded part of the data, so she and Gosling set out to capture a higher-quality repeat. The result was the crisp, striking X-pattern that has since become one of the most reproduced images in science. Seen this way, Photo 51 is not evidence of a missed opportunity but of a scientist methodically refining her experiment to squeeze more information out of her samples.

The researchers reached their conclusions through an unusually thorough reconstruction of the experimental record. They examined laboratory notebooks, manuscripts, photographs and other historical documents held in collections in Philadelphia, Cambridge and London. They also studied Franklin’s original X-ray camera and photographic slides preserved in the archives of King’s College London, allowing them to understand the technical conditions under which the images were produced. By combining the history of the instruments with the history of the ideas, they could piece together why Photo 51 was taken and what Franklin already understood when she took it.

The collaboration itself began with an archival acquisition. Alistair Sponsel, oral historian and curator of life sciences at the Science History Institute, started re-examining Franklin’s DNA research in 2025 after the institute acquired the History of Molecular Biology Collection from the J. Craig Venter Institute. The collection includes Franklin’s own copy of Photo 51, alongside notebooks, correspondence, photographs and other material documenting the history of molecular biology. Sponsel’s research led him to archives in the United Kingdom, including those of King’s College London, where Franklin and Gosling carried out their DNA work. There he joined forces with Brian Sutton, Emeritus Professor of Molecular Biophysics at King’s, who had long been interested in the X-ray crystallographic studies of DNA carried out by his predecessors at the college.

Sutton described how the partnership changed his own view of the famous image. He noted that he had been accompanying visitors to the King’s College Archives over many years, and that the highlight and focus of attention was always the original glass negative of Photograph 51. Just over a year ago, he was introduced to Sponsel, a historian of science visiting the Archive, and they very quickly realised that they looked at Photograph 51 in different ways, and that together they might better understand exactly why she and Gosling took it, and in particular the importance of Photograph 49. He described it as exciting to see Photograph 51 in a different light.

Sponsel, for his part, emphasised how the two researchers, coming from different disciplinary backgrounds, converged on the same questions. He said that he and Sutton were each intrigued by the same features of Photo 51 and wanted a deeper understanding of why the image looked the way it did. After studying so many documents and artifacts together, he said, they were excited to realise they shared a new understanding, not just of how the photograph was made, but of why Franklin had been motivated to take Photo 51 in the first place. He added that they had fun working together and learning to see these original sources through each other’s eyes.

The researchers are careful to say that their findings do not diminish the importance of Watson and Crick’s work in developing the double-helix model. What the study provides instead is a fuller picture of how Franklin’s own experimental work contributed to understanding DNA’s structure, and evidence that she fully appreciated the significance of her work, in particular Photo 51. The study also highlights a broader methodological point: understanding the technical details of how scientific experiments are carried out is essential when reconstructing the history of major discoveries. Without knowing how an X-ray camera worked, how a blemish on film could obscure data, and why a scientist would repeat an exposure, the historical record can be misread in ways that distort who understood what, and when.

The archival dimension of the work is central to its significance. Dr Alexandra Eveleigh, Head of Archives at King’s College London, noted that the King’s Archives preserve photographs, laboratory records, correspondence and other original materials that provide a direct connection to the pioneering scientific research carried out at the university. In this study, she said, archives were used as evidence to re-examine how, when and why the famous Photo 51 came to be produced, revealing the structure of DNA. This, she argued, illustrates the vital role of archives in the history of science: by preserving the original record, they allow established accounts to be revisited and refined, leading to a fuller and more nuanced understanding of how major scientific discoveries are made and of the contributions of the people behind them.

For decades, the story of the double helix has been told as a drama of insight and oversight, with Franklin cast as the brilliant experimentalist who came so close and yet somehow fell short. The new research replaces that drama with something more precise and, in its way, more impressive: a scientist who read a flawed photograph, extracted real structural information from it, recognised what a cleaner image could reveal, and deliberately set out to make one. Photo 51 was not a moment of luck that slipped through her fingers. It was the product of her own understanding, and the historical record, carefully re-read, now says so.

Subject of Research: Historical analysis of Rosalind Franklin's X-ray diffraction photographs of DNA and her role in determining its helical structure

Article Title: Rosalind Franklin deliberately created ‘Photo 51’ after using an earlier image to uncover features of DNA’s helical structure

Article References: Rosalind Franklin deliberately created ‘Photo 51’ after using an earlier image to uncover features of DNA’s helical structure. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: Rosalind Franklin, Photo 51, Photo 49, DNA, double helix, X-ray crystallography, history of science, King's College London, Science History Institute, James Watson, Francis Crick, Raymond Gosling

The study was prompted by a real forensic case that illustrates the problem vividly. An eight-year-old male victim reported that anal penetration had occurred, and intimate swabs were sent for forensic testing. Short Tandem Repeat analysis, the standard technique for matching DNA to individuals, revealed a mixture containing an unknown major component that matched the suspect’s profile. Yet tests for semen, saliva and blood all returned negative results. Skin contact was considered an unlikely explanation for the high amount of DNA detected, and the investigators suggested pre-ejaculate as a potential source. Without a validated method to confirm the presence of this fluid, however, the source of the DNA could not be determined, and the DNA report alone could not prove that sexual activity had occurred. The detection of pre-ejaculate, the authors note, could have substantially contributed to reconstructing the course of events.

Pre-ejaculate, colloquially known as pre-cum, is produced by the bulbourethral glands, also called Cowper’s glands, which sit below the prostate within the male pelvic floor. The fluid is released during sexual arousal and serves as a natural lubricant, while also preparing the urethra for ejaculation by creating a sperm-friendly pH environment. Its composition is known to be heterogeneous, containing glucose, leukocytes, occasional epithelial cells, enzymes and glycoproteins. Importantly, the volume of secretion varies enormously between individuals, with some men producing little to none and others producing comparatively large amounts. The fluid is not only secreted before ejaculation but also during the ejaculatory phase itself, which means that pre-ejaculate and semen can become mixed in a single sample, complicating any attempt to attribute findings to one fluid or the other.

One of the most contested questions in the literature concerns whether pre-ejaculate contains spermatozoa. Previous studies have reached conflicting conclusions: some have reported the presence of sperm in collected samples, while others have found none. The German team addressed this uncertainty directly by screening every sample microscopically before analysis. Ninety-four male donors aged 20 to 59 collected samples at home using Copan FLOQSwabs, which were transported in thermal envelopes and frozen at minus 20 degrees Celsius. Using the Sperm HY-LITER kit, a human-specific monoclonal antibody-based fluorescence staining method that visualises sperm heads, the researchers examined each sample under a Zeiss Axioscope 5 fluorescence microscope. Spermatozoa were detected in 35 of the 94 samples, which were excluded from further analysis, even when only a single sperm cell was observed. The remaining 58 samples, genuinely sperm-free, formed the basis of the study.

The exclusion of nearly half the samples is itself revealing. The authors attribute the presence of sperm in so many collected specimens to contamination, most likely residual semen left in the urethra from a prior ejaculation that was washed out by the pre-ejaculate. This finding is consistent with earlier studies that reported divergent results on sperm content, and it underscores the practical difficulties of collecting pre-ejaculate without admixture. The researchers also acknowledge a residual limitation: ejaculate from azoospermic donors, who produce no detectable sperm, could theoretically have been misclassified as pre-ejaculate. This risk was reduced, though not eliminated, by recruiting donors of reproductive age and providing written instructions to collect the fluid early enough to avoid mixing with ejaculate.

With the sperm-free samples secured, the team tested how three standard forensic assays for seminal fluid reacted to pre-ejaculate, and the results were strikingly inconsistent. The RSID-Semen test, which detects semenogelin, a protein specific to seminal fluid, returned negative in all 58 samples. The Seratec PSA-Semiquant test, which detects prostate-specific antigen, was positive in 84.5 percent of samples. The Phosphatesmo KM test for acid phosphatase produced a substantial proportion of ambiguous results, with 31.0 percent of samples that could not be clearly classified; of the remainder, 29.3 percent were positive and 39.7 percent negative. The pattern suggests that low quantities of PSA and acid phosphatase may be present in pre-ejaculate, producing positive results in some samples but not others, while semenogelin, being specific to seminal fluid, is absent altogether.

These divergent test results carry serious implications for forensic practice. Because PSA and acid phosphatase assays are commonly used as presumptive tests for semen, a positive result on such a test could in principle originate from pre-ejaculate even in the complete absence of semen or seminal fluid. Conversely, a negative result, for example on a semenogelin assay, might lead investigators to exclude a sample from further DNA analysis, with the risk of missing crucial case information. The authors emphasise that this inconsistency reflects the poorly understood molecular composition of pre-ejaculate and complicates forensic interpretation in casework. Their findings align with a 2021 review by Kelly and colleagues, which first highlighted the forensic relevance of pre-ejaculate, and with prior reports that semenogelin assays yield negative results for pre-ejaculate while PSA and acid phosphatase may be present.

The DNA analysis delivered the study’s headline finding. Yields reached up to 436 nanograms, an amount far exceeding what is typically needed for genetic profiling. From 49 of the 58 samples, full STR profiles could be generated; these samples contained a mean total DNA amount of 23.616 nanograms and a median of 2.768 nanograms. Two further samples produced partial profiles, with ten fully typed STR markers and possible allelic dropouts in the remaining six systems, from DNA quantities of just 0.068 and 0.044 nanograms; despite the dropouts, both profiles would meet the criteria for submission to the national DNA database. No profile could be generated from seven samples, which had a mean DNA yield of only 0.027 nanograms. The DNA quantities observed in the study would comfortably explain the trace amounts found in the rape case that inspired the investigation, where stains in the anal canal and perianal area contained 1.272 and 6.712 nanograms respectively.

The authors are candid about the limitations of their methodology. Because donors collected samples unsupervised at home, neither the volume of fluid nor the swab handling could be standardised, and this variability likely contributed to the wide spread in DNA concentrations. A single swab was used across all analyses to rule out sperm contamination as far as possible, and DNA was extracted from the sample pad of the immunochromatographic test cassette rather than directly from the swabs, meaning only a fraction of the available material was utilised. Direct smearing of swabs onto microscope slides and filter papers, done to minimise sample loss, raises the possibility that insufficient transfer in individual samples produced false-negative results. Positive semen and negative water controls were run with each batch to monitor detection reliability, but they cannot confirm adequate material transfer in every sample.

Perhaps the deepest open question concerns where the DNA in pre-ejaculate actually comes from. Microscopic examination found isolated cells or cell-like structures in 23 of the sperm-free samples, while in the remaining 35 the findings were inconclusive. Some samples showed no detectable cells at all despite containing enough DNA for full STR typing, leaving the cellular origin of the genetic material unresolved. It remains unclear whether the DNA derives from urethral epithelial cells or from cell-free DNA, and the cellular composition of the fluid appears highly variable and poorly characterised. No validated method currently exists for the specific detection of pre-ejaculate as a distinct body fluid. The authors argue that further research is essential to characterise it reliably, both to confirm its presence at crime scenes and to differentiate it from semen. As they conclude, pre-ejaculate appears to be a key DNA source in sexual offences, and its current invisibility to routine forensic testing means that evidence central to reconstructing events may be going unnoticed.

Subject of Research: Forensic characterization of pre-ejaculate as a DNA source in sexual assault investigations

Article Title: Pre-ejaculate – an overlooked body fluid with high amounts of DNA

Article References: Lienesch, M., Sibbing, U., Schürenkamp, M., Vennemann, M., & Bauer, H. (2026). Pre-ejaculate – an overlooked body fluid with high amounts of DNA. International Journal of Legal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-026-04003-9

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s00414-026-04003-9

Keywords: pre-ejaculate, forensic science, DNA, STR profiling, bulbourethral glands, semen detection, sexual assault, body fluid identification, prostate-specific antigen, acid phosphatase, semenogelin, International Journal of Legal Medicine