August 2017

Table of Contents - PeerJ (Biology Articles)

Sorted by pageviews
Biology
computational-science bioinformatics
Login to save + alerts
Use of necrophagous insects as evidence of cadaver relocation: myth or reality?

Dermestid beetles and flies on a skeletonized human skull

August 1, 2017

Use of necrophagous insects as evidence of cadaver relocation: myth or reality?

Researchers conducted an extensive review to determine whether (and under which conditions) insects can be used as evidence to tell if a body has been moved.

- read article

August 14, 2017
GeNET: a web application to explore and share Gene Co-expression Network Analysis data
4 citations
434 downloads
3,897 views
, , ,
bioinformatics
computational-biology
genomics
computational-science
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3678 PubMed 28828272
August 30, 2017
Atropos: specific, sensitive, and speedy trimming of sequencing reads
72 citations
656 downloads
2,638 views
, ,
bioinformatics
genomics
computational-science
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3720 PubMed 28875074
August 28, 2017
BioFuelDB: a database and prediction server of enzymes involved in biofuels production
4 citations
569 downloads
2,426 views
, , ,
bioinformatics
computational-science
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3497 PubMed 28875065
Use of necrophagous insects as evidence of cadaver relocation: myth or reality?

Dermestid beetles and flies on a skeletonized human skull

August 1, 2017

Use of necrophagous insects as evidence of cadaver relocation: myth or reality?

Researchers conducted an extensive review to determine whether (and under which conditions) insects can be used as evidence to tell if a body has been moved.

- read article

Archives - Biology

computational-science bioinformatics
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013

Filter on subjects this month

I told my colleagues that PeerJ is a journal where they need to publish if they want their paper to be published quickly and with the strict peer review expected from a good journal.
Sohath Vanegas,
PeerJ Author
View author feedback