Volume 57, Issue 1 pp. 12-18

PAPER
ANTHROPOLOGY

Differential Decomposition Patterns in Charred Versus Un-Charred Remains

Ariel Gruenthal M.Sc.,

Ariel Gruenthal M.Sc.

School of Forensic and Investigative Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, U.K.

Search for more papers by this author

Colin Moffatt Ph.D.,

Colin Moffatt Ph.D.

School of Forensic and Investigative Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, U.K.

Search for more papers by this author

Tal Simmons Ph.D.,

Tal Simmons Ph.D.

School of Forensic and Investigative Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, U.K.

Search for more papers by this author

Ariel Gruenthal M.Sc.,

Ariel Gruenthal M.Sc.

School of Forensic and Investigative Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, U.K.

Search for more papers by this author

Colin Moffatt Ph.D.,

Colin Moffatt Ph.D.

School of Forensic and Investigative Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, U.K.

Search for more papers by this author

Tal Simmons Ph.D.,

Tal Simmons Ph.D.

School of Forensic and Investigative Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, U.K.

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 16 September 2011

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01909.x

Citations: 34

Additional information and reprint requests:
Tal Simmons, Ph.D.
Maudland Building
School of Forensic and Investigative Sciences
University of Central Lancashire
Preston, PR1 2HE
U.K.
E-mail: [email protected]

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Abstract

Abstract: Although researchers have examined many aspects of fire modification, the rate and pattern of decomposition in charred remains have not been studied previously. This study utilized 48 domestic pigs, divided into 24 charred (head, neck, and limbs burned to Crow–Glassman level 1 and torso to level 2) and 24 un-charred pig carcasses. Decomposition of control carcasses was scored at 50 accumulated degree days (ADD) intervals, and charred carcasses were also observed and photographed at this time. A Charred Body Scale was subsequently created, and charred carcasses were scored retrospectively for the same ADD intervals. Analysis using a mixed-effect repeated measures model indicated that, while decomposition rate was not statistically different between the two groups (p = 0.2692), the charred remains initially displayed an ostensibly more advanced pattern. Body regions displaying significant charring decomposed at a faster rate (p < 0.001), while areas with very light levels of charring decomposed at a significantly slower rate (p < 0.001).

References

1 Grisbaum GA, Ubelaker DH. An analysis of forensic anthropology cases submitted to the Smithsonian Institution by the Federal Bureau of Investigation from 1962 to 1994. Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology 2001;(45): 1–15.
10.5479/si.00810223.45.1
Google Scholar
2 Sledzik P, Rodriguez WC. Damnum fatale: the taphonomic fate of human remains in mass disasters. In: WD Haglund, MH Sorg, editors. Advances in forensic taphonomy: method, theory and archaeological perspective. Salem, MA: CRC Press, 2002; 321–9.
Google Scholar
3 Bohnert M, Rost T, Pollak S. The degree of destructions of human bodies in relation to the duration of the fire. Forensic Sci Int 1998; 95: 11–21.
10.1016/S0379-0738(98)00076-0
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4 Bass WM. Is it possible to consume a body completely in a fire? In: TA Rathbun, JE Buikstra, editors. Human identification: case studies in forensic anthropology. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 1984; 159–67.
Google Scholar
5 Sledzik P, Micozzi MS. Autopsied, embalmed and preserved human remains: distinguishing features in forensic and historic contexts. In: WD Haglund, MH Sorg, editors. Forensic taphonomy: the postmortem fate of human remains. Salem, MA: CRC Press Inc, 1997; 483–93.
Google Scholar
6 Dirkmaat DC. Recovery and interpretation of the fatal fire victim: the role of forensic anthropology. In: WD Haglund, MH Sorg, editors. Advances in forensic taphonomy: method, theory and archaeological perspectives. Salem, MA: CRC Press Inc, 2002; 451–71.
Google Scholar
7 Symes SA, Rainwater CW, Chapman EN, Gipson DR, Piper AL. Patterned thermal destruction of human remains in a forensic setting. In: CW Schmidt, SA Symes, editors. The analysis of burned human remains. London, UK: Academic Press, 2008; 15–54.
10.1016/B978-012372510-3.50004-6
Web of Science® Google Scholar
8 Ubelaker DH. The forensic evaluation of burned remains: a synthesis. Forensic Sci Int 2008; 183: 1–5.
10.1016/j.forsciint.2008.09.019
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9 DeHaan JD, Campbell SJ, Nurbakhsh S. Combustion of animal fats and its implication for the consumption of human bodies in fires. Sci Justice 1999; 39: 27–38.
10.1016/S1355-0306(99)72011-3
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
10 DeHaan JD, Nurbakhsh S. Sustained combustion of an animal carcass and its implications for the consumption of human bodies in fires. J Forensic Sci 2001; 46: 1076–81.
10.1520/JFS15101J
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11 Fanton L, Jaded K, Tilhet-Coartet S, Malicier D. Criminal burning. Forensic Sci Int 2006; 158: 87–93.
10.1016/j.forsciint.2005.04.040
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
12 Barillo DJ, Goode R. Fire fatality study: demographics of fire victims. Burns 1996; 22: 85–8.
10.1016/0305-4179(95)00095-X
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
13 DeHaan JD. Fire and bodies. In: CW Schmidt, SA Symes, editors. The analysis of burned human remains. London, UK: Academic Press, 2008; 1–14.
10.1016/B978-012372510-3.50003-4
Web of Science® Google Scholar
14 Glassman DM, Crow RM. Standardization model for describing the extent of burn injury to human remains. J Forensic Sci 1996; 41: 152–4.
10.1520/JFS13915J
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15 Gerling I, Meissner C, Oehmichen M. Death from thermal effects and burns. Forensic Sci Int 2001; 115: 33–41.
10.1016/S0379-0738(00)00302-9
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16 Vincent D. The effects of heat-modification on sharp force trauma in charred remains. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences; 2010 Feb 22–27; Seattle, WA. Colorado Springs, CO: American Academy of Forensic Sciences, 2010; 350.
Google Scholar
17 Cross P, Simmons T. The influence of penetrative trauma on the rate of decomposition. J Forensic Sci 2010; 55(2): 295–301.
10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01277.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18 Cross P, Simmons T, Cunliffe R, Chatfield L. Establishing a taphonomic research facility in the UK. Forensic Sci Policy Manag Int J 2010; 1(4): 187–91.
10.1080/19409041003653095
Google Scholar
19 Megyesi MS, Nawrocki SP, Haskell NH. Using accumulated degree-days to estimate the postmortem interval for decomposed human remains. J Forensic Sci 2005; 50: 1–9.
10.1520/JFS2004017
Web of Science® Google Scholar
20 Adlam RE, Simmons T. The effect of repeated physical disturbance on soft tissue decomposition—are taphonomic studies and accurate reflection of decomposition? J Forensic Sci 2007; 52: 1007–13.
10.1111/j.1556-4029.2007.00510.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21 R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2009, http://www.R-project.org.
Google Scholar
22 Pinheiro J, Bates B, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, R Core Team. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-93. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2009, http://www.R-project.org.
Google Scholar
23 Haglund WD. Rodents and human remains. In: WD Haglund, MH Sorg, editors. Forensic taphonomy: the postmortem fate of human remains. Salem, MA: CRC Press Inc, 1997; 405–14.
Google Scholar
24 Anderson GS. Insect succession on carrion and its relationship to determining time of death. In: JH Byrd, JA Castner, editors. Forensic entomology: the utility of arthropods in legal investigations. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Inc, 2001; 143–75.
Google Scholar
25 Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ. Biometry: the principles and practices of statistics in biological research, 3rd edn. New York, NY: WH Freeman and Co., 1994.
Google Scholar
26 Bass WM. Outdoor decomposition rates in Tennessee. In: WD Haglund, MH Sorg, editors. Forensic taphonomy: the postmortem fate of human remains. Salem, MA: CRC Press Inc, 1997; 181–6.
Google Scholar
27 Komar DA. Forensic taphonomy in a cold climate region: a field study in central Alberta and a potential new method of determining time since death [PhD dissertation]. Alberta (Canada): University of Alberta, 1999.
Google Scholar
28 Campobasso CP, Di Vella G, Introna F. Factors affecting decomposition and Diptera colonization. Forensic Sci Int 2001; 120: 18–27.
10.1016/S0379-0738(01)00411-X
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
29 Simmons T, Adlam R, Moffatt C. Debugging decomposition data—comparative taphonomic studies and the influence of insects and carcass size on decomposition rate. J Forensic Sci 2010; 55(1): 8–13.
10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01206.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume57, Issue1

January 2012

Pages 12-18

Differential Decomposition Patterns in Charred Versus Un-Charred Remains

Abstract

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Differential Decomposition Patterns in Charred Versus Un-Charred Remains

Abstract

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information