4.6 Article

The applicability of forensic time since death estimation methods for buried bodies in advanced decomposition stages

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 15, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243395

关键词

-

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P31490]
  2. Foundation Forensisches Forum
  3. Tu-Ba Foundation for Legal Medicine
  4. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P31490] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Estimation of the postmortem interval in advanced postmortem stages is a challenging task. Although there are several approaches available for addressing postmortem changes of a (human) body or its environment (ecologically and/or biochemically), most are restricted to specific timeframes and/or individual and environmental conditions. It is well known, for instance, that buried bodies decompose in a remarkably different manner than on the ground surface. However, data on how established methods for PMI estimation perform under these conditions are scarce. It is important to understand whether and how postmortem changes are affected under burial conditions, if corrective factors could be conceived, or if methods have to be excluded for respective cases. We present the first multi-methodological assessment of human postmortem decomposition carried out on buried body donors in Europe, at the Amsterdam Research Initiative for Sub-surface Taphonomy and Anthropology (ARISTA) in the Netherlands. We used a multidisciplinary approach to investigate postmortem changes of morphology, skeletal muscle protein decomposition, presence of insects and other necrophilous animals as well as microbial communities (i.e., microbiomes) from August to November 2018 associated with two complete body exhumations and eight partial exhumations. Our results clearly display the current possibilities and limitations of methods for PMI estimation in buried remains and provide a baseline for future research and application.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据