Abstract
AbstractThe estimation of the postmortem interval (PMI) is one of the key challenges for forensic anthropologists. Although there are several methods referenced for this purpose, none is sufficiently effective. One of the main reasons justifying the complexity of this task is the influence of several taphonomic factors.The study of the Luminol technique has stood out as a promising method for estimating PMI, complementing the existing methods, since it is an economic, easy and reproducible method that operates as a presumptive test. However, it is not known which taphonomic factors can influence the results obtained by this technique.The aim of this study is to test the influence of taphonomic factors, such as temperature, humidity, soil type and pH, on the estimation of the PMI by the Luminol technique.In order to test the influence of the referred factors, a sample consisting of 30 clavicles, with known and similar PMI, collected from autopsies, was distributed as evenly as possible by six vases and buried with different decomposition conditions for a period of 12 months. After the exhumation and sample preparation, the Luminol technique was applied.It was possible to clearly observe differences in the results. Thus, according to our research, it is possible to conclude that the results obtained by the application of Luminol are influenced by taphonomic factors. Therefore, the context in which a body is found should always be considered for applying this technique.
Funder
Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia
Universidade de Coimbra
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Pathology and Forensic Medicine
Reference41 articles.
1. Cameron A, Oxenham M (2020) The postmortem interval and skeletal remains. In: Hayman J, Oxenham M (eds) Estimation of the time since death - current research and future trends. Academic Press, London, pp 141–164
2. Cunha E, Cattaneo C (2006) Forensic anthropology and forensic pathology: the state of art. In: Schmitt A, Cunha E, Pinheiro J (eds) Forensic anthropology and medicine. Complementary sciences from recovery to cause of death. Humana Press Inc, Totowa, pp 39–56
3. Forbes SL, Nugent K (2009) Dating of anthropological skeletal remains of forensic interest. In: Blau S, Ubelaker D (eds) Handbook of forensic anthropology and archaeology. Routledge, New York, pp 213–225
4. Ermida C, Cunha E, Ferreira MT (2022) Dating death: postmortem interval estimation of human skeletal remains. Antropol Port 39:45–72. https://doi.org/10.14195/2182-7982_39_3
5. DiMaio VJM, Molina DK (2021) DiMaio’s Forensic Pathology. CRC Press, Boca Raton