Forensic Science International
Volume 183, Issue 1 , Pages 1-5, 10 January 2009

The forensic evaluation of burned skeletal remains: A synthesis

  • Douglas H. Ubelaker

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence address: Department of Anthropology, Smithsonian Institution, MRC 112, 10th and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20560-0112, United States. Tel.: +1 202 633 1980; fax: +1 202 357 2208.

Department of Anthropology, Smithsonian Institution, NMNH, MRC 112, Washington, DC 20560-0112, United States

Received 17 September 2008; accepted 25 September 2008. published online 17 November 2008.

Article Outline

Abstract 

In recent years, research and case experience have greatly augmented knowledge regarding the effects of extreme heat on skeletal remains. As a result of this effort, enhanced interpretation is now possible on such issues as the extent of recovery, reconstruction, trauma, individual identification, size reduction, thermal effects on histological structures, color variation, the determination if remains were burned with or without soft tissue, DNA recovery and residual weight. The rapidly growing literature in this area of forensic science includes experimental research that elucidates the dynamics of the thermal impact on skeletal structure and morphology.

Keywords: Burning, Skeletal, Thermal

 

Back to Article Outline

1. Introduction 

Although many cases in forensic anthropology involve interpretation of burned bone, until relatively recently few scientific studies have focused specifically on this topic. Since thermal alterations can occur in all types of cases routinely examined in forensic anthropology, analysis is needed to address a variety of issues. These issues include recovery, reconstruction, trauma interpretation, bone recognition, weight interpretation, thermal correlations with coloration, shrinkage and structural changes, distinguishing bones burned in the flesh from those burned without flesh, technological analysis and DNA extraction techniques and success rates. A growing scientific literature is now available to address these issues facilitating interpretation and allowing more precise analysis in the variety of burned cases that enter our laboratories.

Back to Article Outline

2. Case applications 

A variety of events can lead to burned skeletal remains. These include aircraft accidents, bombing and explosions and earthquakes [1]. Homicides, suicides [2] and accidental deaths all can involve the use of fire with variable results on human remains [3]. Fire can be employed to attempt to destroy forensic evidence in criminal cases, often to attempt to prevent identification and recovery [4]. Archeological samples can present evidence of burning [5], [6] and thus provide time depth to the issues involved.

Even commercial cremations present problems for the forensic examiner. In 2006 Nelson and Winston [7] reported that in Tucson and Pima County Arizona between 2002 and 2003, 0.8% of cremation requests resulted in being medical examiner cases after review. In addition, disputes over commercial cremations result in civil litigation that can involve forensic analysis of the recovered materials.

Thorough reviews of commercial cremation procedures and equipment are provided by Eckert et al. [8], McKinley [9], Merbs [10], Murad [11], Schultz et al. [12], Warren and Schultz [13] and Wells [14]. These sources report that in commercial cremations, retort temperatures range from 500°C to 1000°C but Murad [11] notes that after the heat source is shut down, temperatures can climb to as high as 1278°C. Analysis of remains resulting from commercial cremations includes assessment of minimum number of individuals and commingling issues as well as identification. Identifications are frequently facilitated by recovery and analysis of inclusions such as identification tags, dental restorations and surgical materials.

Back to Article Outline

3. Recovery issues 

Given the nature and context of burned human remains, special care is needed in recovery [15], [16]. Two major factors complicate recovery of burned human remains: fragmentation and context. Soft tissue changes with burning include post-mortem muscle contracture. Dehydration and protein denaturation lead to muscle shortening. Since the bulkier flexors contract more than the extensors, the burn victim frequently presents extreme flexion [17] that has been termed the pugilistic pose.

Since burning can lead to extreme bone fragmentation, care must be taken in analysis at the scene. Ideally, forensic anthropologists should participate in the recovery since they are trained to recognize fragmented human remains. Context is important since in most cases, human remains are located in proximity to other burned similarly appearing materials. It can be challenging, even for trained anthropologists to differentiate small fragments of burned bone and teeth from charred fragments of building materials and other items. Methods of recovery, along with mortuary treatment can affect fragment size as well [5]. Guidelines for recovery emphasize recognition of the possibility of fragmentation, utilization of forensic anthropologists and a cautious approach that facilitates in situ assessment of recovered human remains.

Back to Article Outline

4. Analysis 

As in all areas of forensic anthropological analysis, the particular procedures employed are case driven and shaped by the nature of the evidence and its context. Publications are available offering detailed information on procedures and methodology [3], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26]. The following presents a focused discussion of the major methodological approaches available and their applications.

Back to Article Outline

5. Reconstruction 

A frequently overlooked element in the analysis of burned human remains is reconstruction. Reconstruction provides a more holistic opportunity for morphological interpretation and can greatly facilitate determinations of human vs. non-human animal and recognition of specific skeletal elements [27]. Reconstruction can also increase the probability of identification [28] and recognition of trauma. Even fragmented calcined remains can be reconstructed, improving the strength of assessment of the minimal number of individuals present.

Back to Article Outline

6. Trauma 

Trauma interpretation in skeletal remains cases involving burning can be difficult due to heat related fractures and fragmentation. However, both experimental studies and casework experience indicate that diagnostic evidence of trauma can survive the burning event. In a 2004 experimental approach working with cranial bone, Pope and Smith [29] documented the post-burning survival of pre-existing trauma. Conducting similar research in 2002, de Gruchy and Rogers [30] were able to identify chop marks in cremated bone but found that their appearance could be influenced by burning-related fragmentation.

Herrmann and Bennett [31] also found that signatures of sharp force trauma survived incineration but argued that an analysis of fracture patterns and surface morphology was required. They suggested that blunt force trauma was difficult to distinguish from heat related fractures. In a major case application, the study of the decedents of the Branch Davidian incident in Waco, Texas [32], [33] also demonstrated that various kinds of perimortem trauma could survive the burning process.

Since heat exposure can lead to extensive bone fracturing, differentiating perimortem trauma from postmortem thermal related alterations can be challenging. Symes et al. [34] provide useful discussion of this issue, noting that observations of the pattern of fractures can enhance diagnosis.

Back to Article Outline

7. Survival of material useful for identification 

When minimal thermal changes are present on remains, normal procedures for identification can be followed. Extensive heat related alterations can severely disrupt normal procedures but frequently, sufficient evidence survives to facilitate identification. Shrinkage, fragmentation and shape alterations can affect skeletal analysis and must be considered in analysis. Age at death and disease can be factors as well since experimental research indicates that osteoporotic bone tends to fragment with greater frequency than healthy bone [35]. Fragmentation can facilitate degradation of organic materials such as albumin useful for identification [36]. Identification of specific skeletal elements can be useful for the calculation of the minimal number of individuals present and to discover discrepancies in the ages represented.

Even in the calcined fragments resulting from commercial cremations, useful information can survive. For example, evidence of arteriosclerosis has been reported to survive commercial cremation [37]. Non-skeletal inclusions, such as surgical materials, dental restorations and identification tags can survive cremation and be useful for identification [38], [12]. Some methodological approaches have been advanced specifically for burned remains [39], [40], [41].

Experimental research indicates that in bone samples heated to temperatures between 800°C and 1200°C histological structure was preserved for analysis but human mitochondrial DNA and some human albumin did not survive [42]. At higher temperatures, histological structures can be altered as well [43]. Grupe and Hummel [44] found that following cremation, trace element information was limited due to “volatilization and crystal modification”. Bones exposed to temperatures above 200°C can present altered values of nitrogen and carbon isotopes [45].

Back to Article Outline

8. Shrinkage 

A growing literature of experimental studies documents the range of bone shrinkage related to burning [46]. Low temperatures (less than 800°C) of minimal duration produce minimal shrinkage [47]. However, temperatures as low as 300°C can lead to loss of human albumin [48]. When only minimal heat has been applied, the effects of and evidence for burning can be difficult to detect [49]. The ultimate skeletal effects are determined not just by the temperature of the heat applied but also duration of the heat event, oxygen supply and the extent of flesh or other protective materials in contact with the skeletal remains [50]. The extent of protective materials present represents an important factor since they maximize differences in temperature between that of the heat source and the temperature of the effected skeletal remains [50]. Since temperature of the heat source can differ extensively from bone temperature, the duration of the heat becomes important [51], [52].

In a 1970 study, Van Vark [43] provided key information regarding temperature related shrinkage of bone dimensions. Experiments involved combustion of fragments of femur, patella and mandible in an electric oven. Dimensions recorded at successive intervals of 100 degrees at temperatures ranging from 200°C to 1500°C. Shrinkage was initiated at 700°C, augmented at 800°C and no further shrinkage was found at higher temperatures. Subsequent research has suggested considerable variation in shrinkage, correlated with temperature, duration of heat exposure and bone type [3].

Back to Article Outline

9. Structural changes 

Transmission electron microscopy study on sheep humeri indicates that relatively minimal heat causes changes in collagen fibrils within bone [53]. Scanning electron microscopy indicates that between 150°C and 1150°C heat temperature effects on bone structures were not apparent [54]. However, the general literature suggests that between 800°C and 1400°C new crystals appear, with some crystal fusion above 1000°C. At 1600°C and above, melting of bone mineral can occur with recrystalization after cooling [54]. Shipman et al. [52] document growth in the crystal size of hydroxyapatite during experiments with controlled burning of sheep and goat bones. Experimental research by Sillen and Hoering [55] found some increase in crystallinity between 200°C and 700°C and with temperatures above 700°C apatite was transformed into whitlockite. Sillen and Hoering [55] also found that char was produced between temperatures of 300°C and 500°C.

Holden et al. [56] documented that the organic component of bone survived until temperatures of 400°C. Beginning at 600°C the bone mineral recrystallized. Melting of bone mineral occurred at 1600°C.

Experimental studies with wood fires in natural environments indicate that crystal changes can occur [57]. Calcination is closely linked to contact with live coals [57]. With such fires, minimal changes in surface texture are observed below temperature of 500°C and staining results from materials in the immediate environment [58]. The Spennemann and Colley [58] research indicates that considerable fragmentation occurs during recovery.

Wilson and Massey [59] found in their scanning electron microscopy study of incinerated teeth that dentin presented structural changes beginning at about 600°C. Beginning at about 800°C enamel rods presented altered structure.

Back to Article Outline

10. Coloration 

The color of bone fragments affected by high temperatures is a function of oxygen availability, duration and temperature [60], [61]. David's 1990 experimental work [51] found that in a controlled brushfire, no calcination occurred and fragments appeared brown and black. A campfire size burn using eucalyptus wood reached a temperature of 840°C in one hour and five minutes and produced white, calcined fragments with some grey and black coloration. Bones removed from this fire after only 25min displayed a color range of black, brown, grey and white/blue.

Of course, the full range of color alterations can be found within a single skeleton and even on a single bone, especially in cases of the burning of fleshed remains [34]. Recently, Symes et al. [34] have called attention to the protective role played by soft tissue in thermal color changes in bone. They note that within a relatively short distance, soft tissue protected bone can display a sequence of calcined, charred, border and heat line zones which define the area of bone exposure to heat and help to differentiate bones burned in the flesh vs. those burned as dry bone. Color changes in teeth are similar to those documented in bone [62], [63].

Experimental work by Spennemann and Colley in 1989 [58] documented that augmented heat and fire duration increasingly produced white fragments but with considerable variation. Staining of bone fragments producing a variety of colors resulted from contact with different materials in the environment. Earlier, Dunlop [64] had reported that copper produced a pink color in cremated bones, iron a green color and zinc a yellow color. Bone color can vary within different areas of a recovery site, reflecting variation in soil composition, the specific skeletal elements exposed and related factors [65].

Back to Article Outline

11. Fleshed vs. dry bone 

Early experiments by Baby in 1954 [66], Binford in 1963 [67] and Thurman and Willmore in 1981 [68] helped define differences between bones burned in the flesh vs. those burned without flesh. These studies documented that dry bones exhibited longitudinal splitting and superficial checking of the external surfaces and less evidence of warping. In contrast, those burned with flesh displayed considerable warping, transverse fractures, frequently in a curvilinear pattern, and more irregular longitudinal splitting.

Whyte [69] conducted experiments with non-human animal remains. Burning of fleshed remains produced distinctive fractures sometimes in association with warping. Those burned as dry bone produced less variation in fracture patterns and less evidence of warping.

Back to Article Outline

12. DNA recovery 

Some success has been noted in the recovery of DNA from burned remains. In 1991, Sajantila et al. [70] reported successful DNA typing on all 26 samples extracted from 10 fire victims exhibiting extreme charring. Brown et al. [71] recovered DNA from human early Bronze Age cremated bone from Bedd Branwen, Anglesey.

Experimental work by Tsuchimochi et al. in 2002 [72] indicated that DNA could be amplified and typed successfully from dental pulp after teeth had been exposed to temperatures up to 300°C. Attempts were not successful using teeth exposed to temperatures above 300°C. However, technology to improve the purity and yield of DNA continues to advance [73].

Back to Article Outline

13. Weights 

In 1997 Warren and Maples [74] published results of their examination of 100 individuals before and after cremation. Weights of cremated material from each adult individual ranging from 876 to 3784g with a mean of 2430g. All males presented post cremation values above 2750g and all females had values below 1887g. The percentage of cremains weight to pre-cremation body weight was 3.5% in adults, 2.5% in children and only 1% in infants.

Murad in 1998 [11] summarized previously unpublished research by Sonek in 1992 documenting that the post cremation weights of 150 individuals ranged from 892 to 4045g with a mean of 2348g. In 2004 Bass and Jantz [75] reported post cremation weights from adults in East Tennessee. Male values ranged from 1865 to 5379g with a mean of 3380g. Female values ranged from 1050 to 4000g with a mean of 2350g. The weight data are important to estimate the minimum number of individuals in large commingled samples and to examine the possibility of commingling in civil cases relating to commercial cremations.

Back to Article Outline

14. Additional experimental approaches 

Van Vark's 1970 experimental work [43] documented that between temperatures of 400°C and 800°C the bone fragments became increasingly brittle and microscopic images became unclear. At temperatures of 800°C and above, microscopic imagery changed dramatically with only traces of lacunae being visible.

In 1986 Carr et al. [76] used scanning electron microscope technology to examine incinerated teeth. They found that approach was useful to recognize dental structures in fragmented dental remains.

Experiments by Christensen [35] revealed that osteoporotic bone is more likely to fragment than normal bone. In 1988, Herrmann and Grupe [77] studied trace elements in prehistoric cremated human remains. They found that in cremated bone, the ratio of calcium and phosphorus remained normal but values for magnesium varied. They noted that trace element values are subject to environmental factors.

In 1995, Holden et al. [56] evaluated incinerated human femoral bone using the scanning electron microscope. They documented combustion of the organic component at temperatures up to 400°C. Beginning at 600°C bone mineral began to recrystallize. At 1600°C, bone mineral melted.

A 2006 study by Brooks et al. [78] focused on issues in using elemental analysis to distinguish legitimate cremated remains from those that were contaminated with other materials. In related research, Schultz et al. [12] demonstrates how elemental analysis can aid interpretation when documented reference samples are utilized.

Bush et al. in 2006 [79] used SEM/EDS analysis to examine dental restorative resins. They found that following cremation, values could be utilized to identify the manufactures.

In a recent (2008) innovative geochemical study of ash and soil at an archeological site in Chan Chan, Peru, Brooks et al. [80] examined a 20–30cm thick ash deposit documenting a content consistent with coal ash. Comparative soil geochemistry revealed that the ash deposit, radiocarbon dated at AD 1312–1438 contained elevated levels of calcium and phosphorus consistent with the practice of cremation. One calcined skull fragment was recovered and confirmed as being human using solid-phase double-antibody protein radioimmunoassay [81]. The technique of X-ray diffraction was employed to suggest that the bone had been burned to temperatures of about 520°C.

Back to Article Outline

15. Summary 

In recent decades, research and case experience have greatly augmented our scholarly capability to recognize and interpret burned skeletal remains. However, additional research, especially innovative experimental approaches, are needed to clarify key issues such as differentiating bones burned in the flesh vs. those burned as dry bone, interpretations of perimortem trauma and clarification of the variety of factors that lead to the myriad of thermal effects that have been documented to date.

Back to Article Outline

References 

  1. Sledzik PS, Rodriguez WC. Damnum fatale: the taphonomic fate of human remains in mass disasters. In:  Haglund WD,  Sorg MH editor. Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory and Archaeological Perspectives. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2002;p. 321–330
  2. Shkrum MJ, Johnston KA. Fire and suicide: a three-year study of self-immolation deaths. J. Forensic Sci. 1992;37(1):208–221
  3. Fairgrieve SI. Forensic Cremation: Recovery and Analysis. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2008;
  4. Fanton L, Jdeed K, Tilhet-Coartet S, Malicier D. Criminal burning. Forensic Sci. Int. 2006;158:87–93
  5. McKinley JI. Bone fragment size in British cremation burials and its implications for pyre technology and ritual. J. Archaeol. Sci. 1994;21:339–342
  6. Ubelaker DH, Rife JL. The practice of cremation in the Roman-era cemetery at Kenchreai, Greece: the perspective from archeology and forensic science. Bioarchaeol. Near East. 2007;1:35–57
  7. Nelson CL, Winston DC. Detection of medical examiner cases from review of cremation requests. Am. J. Forensic Med. Pathol. 2006;27(2):103–105
  8. Eckert WG, James S, Katchis S. Investigation of cremations and severely burned bodies. Am. J. Forensic Med. Pathol. 1988;9(3):188–200
  9. J.I. McKinley, Cremations: expectations, methodologies, and reality, in: C.A. Roberts, F. Lee, J. Bintliff (Eds.), Burial Archaeology: Current Research, Methods, and Developments, BAR British Series 211, Oxford, 1989, pp. 65–76.
  10. Merbs CF. Cremated human remains from point of pines. Arizona: a new approach. Am. Antiquity. 1967;32(4):498–506
  11. Murad TA. The growing popularity of cremation versus inhumation: some forensic implications. In:  Reichs KJ editors. Forensic Osteology: Advances in the Identification of Human Remains. 2nd edition. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas; 1998;p. 86–105
  12. Schultz JJ, Warren MW, Krigbaum JS. Analysis of human cremains: gross and chemical methods. In:  Schmidt CW,  Symes SA editor. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains. London: Academic Press; 2008;p. 75–94
  13. Warren MW, Schultz JJ. Post-cremation taphonomy and artifact preservation. J. Forensic Sci. 2002;47(3):656–659
  14. Wells C. A study of cremation. Antiquity. 1960;34:29–37
  15. Dirkmaat DC. Recovery and interpretation of the fatal fire victim: the role of forensic anthropology. In:  Haglund WD,  Sorg MH editor. Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2002;p. 451–472
  16. J.I. McKinley, C. Roberts, Excavation and post-excavation treatment of cremated and inhumed human remains, Institute of Field Archaeologists, Technical Paper Number 13, 1993.
  17. Saukko P, Knight B. Knight's Forensic Pathology. 3rd edition. London: A Hodder Arnold Publication; 2004;
  18. Gejvall N. Cremations. In:  Brothwell D,  Higgs E editor. Science in Archaeology. 2nd edition. London: Thames and Hudson; 1969;p. 468–479
  19. Kurzawski V, Bouville C, Totoyan C. Fouille d’un ensenble des sépultures àcremation à Martigues (Bouches-du-Rhône). In:  Duday H,  Masse C editor. Anthropologie physique et archéologie: méthodes d’étude des sépultures, Actes du colloque de Toulouse, 4, 5 et 6 novembre 1982. Paris: Presses du CNRS; 1987;p. 67–72
  20. Lisowski FP. The investigation of human cremations. In:  Saller K editors. Anthropologie und Humangenetik. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer Verlag; 1968;p. 76–83
  21. Masset C. Le “Recrutment” d’un ensemble funéraire. In:  Duday H,  Masse C editor. Anthropologie physique et archéologie: méthodes d’étude des sépultures, Actes du colloque de Toulouse, 4, 5 et 6 novembre 1982. Paris: Presses du CNRS; 1987;p. 111–134
  22. Mayne Correia P. Fire modification of bone: a review of the literature. In:  Haglund WD,  Sorg MH editor. Forensic Taphonomy: The Postmortem Fate of Human Remains. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 1997;p. 275–293
  23. Mayne Correia P, Beattie O. A critical look at methods for recovering, evaluating, and interpreting cremated human remains. In:  Haglund WD,  Sorg MH editor. Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2002;p. 435–450
  24. McKinley J. The analysis of cremated bone. In:  Cox M,  Mays S editor. Human Osteology: In Archaeology and Forensic Science. London: Greenwich Medical Media; 2000;p. 403–421
  25. Schmidt CW, Symes SA. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains. London: Academic Press; 2008;
  26. Thompson TJU. Recent advances in the study of burned bone and their implications for forensic anthropology. Forensic Sci. Int. 2004;146S:S203–S205
  27. Curtin AJ. Putting together the pieces: reconstructing mortuary practices from commingled ossuary cremains. In:  Schmidt CW,  Symes SA editor. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains. London: Academic Press; 2008;p. 201–209
  28. Grévin G, Bailet P, Quatrehomme G, Ollier A. Anatomical reconstruction of fragments of burned human bones: a necessary means for forensic identification. Forensic Sci. Int. 1998;96:129–134
  29. Pope EJ, Smith OC. Identification of traumatic injury in burned cranial bone: an experimental approach. J. Forensic Sci. 2004;49(3):431–440
  30. de Gruchy S, Rogers TL. Identifying chop marks on cremated bone: a preliminary study. J. Forensic Sci. 2002;47(5):933–936
  31. Herrmann NP, Bennett JL. The differentiation of traumatic and heat-related fractures in burned bone. J. Forensic Sci. 1999;44(3):461–469
  32. Ubelaker DH, Owsley DW, Houck MM, Craig E, Grant W, Woltanski T, et al. The role of forensic anthropology in the recovery and analysis of Branch Davidian compound victims: recovery procedures and characteristics of the victims. J. Forensic Sci. 1995;40(3):335–340
  33. Owsley DW, Ubelaker DH, Houck MM, Sandness KL, Grant WE, Craig EA, et al. The role of forensic anthropology in the recovery and analysis of Branch Davidian compound victims: techniques of analysis. J. Forensic Sci. 1995;40(3):341–348
  34. Symes SA, Rainwater CW, Chapman EN, Gipson DR, Piper AL. Patterned thermal destruction of human remains in a forensic setting. In:  Schmidt CW,  Symes SA editor. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains. London: Academic Press; 2008;p. 15–54
  35. Christensen AM. Experiments in the combustibility of the human body. J. Forensic Sci. 2002;47(3):466–470
  36. Cattaneo C, Gelsthorpe K, Phillips P, Sokol RJ. Differential survival of albumin in ancient bone. J. Archaeol. Sci. 1995;22:271–276
  37. Warren MW, Falsetti AB, Hamilton WF, Levine LJ. Evidence of arteriosclerosis in cremated remains. Am. J. Forensic Med. Pathol. 1999;20(3):277–280
  38. Murray KA, Rose JC. The analysis of cremains: a case study involving the inappropriate disposal of mortuary remains. J. Forensic Sci. 1993;38(1):98–103
  39. Chandler NP. Cremated teeth. Archaeol. Today. 1987;8(7):41–45
  40. Van Vark GN. The investigation of human cremated skeletal material by multivariate statistical methods. I. Methodology. Ossa. 1974;1:63–95
  41. Van Vark GN. The investigation of human cremated skeletal material by multivariate statistical methods. II. Measures. Ossa. 1975;2(1):47–68
  42. Cattaneo C, DiMartino S, Scali S, Craig OE, Grandi M, Sokol RJ. Determining the human origin of fragments of burnt bone: a comparative study of histological, immunological and DNA techniques. Forensic Sci. Int. 1999;102:181–191
  43. Van Vark GN. Some Statistical Procedures for the Investigation of Prehistoric Human Skeletal Material. Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit te Groningen; 1970;
  44. Grupe G, Hummel S. Trace element studies on experimentally cremated bone. I. Alteration of the chemical composition at high temperatures. J. Archaeol. Sci. 1991;18:177–186
  45. Schurr MR, Hayes RG, Cook DC. Thermally induced changes in the stable carbon and nitrogen isotope ratios of charred bones. In:  Schmidt CW,  Symes SA editor. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains. London: Academic Press; 2008;p. 95–108
  46. Thompson TJU. Heat-induced dimensional changes in bone and their consequences for forensic anthropology. J. Forensic Sci. 2005;50(5):1008–1015
  47. Holland TD. Use of the cranial base in the identification of fire victims. J. Forensic Sci. 1989;34(2):458–460
  48. Cattaneo C, Gelsthorpe K, Sokol RJ, Phillips P. Immunological detection of albumin in ancient human cremations using ELISA and monoclonal antibodies. J. Archaeol. Sci. 1994;21:565–571
  49. Hurlbut SA. The taphonomy of cannibalism: a review of anthropogenic bone modification in the American southwest. Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 2000;10(1):4–26
  50. Duffy JB, Waterfield JD, Skinner MF. Isolation of tooth pulp cells for sex chromatin studies in experimental dehydrated and cremated remains. Forensic Sci. Int. 1991;49:127–141
  51. David B. How was this bone burnt?. In:  Solomon S,  Davidson I,  Watson D editor. Problem Solving in Taphonomy: Archaeological and Palaeontological Studies from Europe, Africa and Oceania, Tempus, Archaeology and Material Culture Studies in Anthropology. vol. 2:Australia: University of Queensland; 1990;p. 65–79
  52. Shipman P, Foster G, Schoeninger M. Burnt bones and teeth: an experimental study of color, morphology, crystal structure and shrinkage. J. Archaeol. Sci. 1984;11:307–325
  53. Koon HEC, Nicholson RA, Collins MJ. A practical approach to the identification of low temperature heated bone using TEM. J. Archaeol. Sci. 2003;30:1393–1399
  54. Quatrehomme G, Bolla M, Muller M, Rocca JP, Grévin G, Bailet P, et al. Experimental single controlled study of burned bones: contribution of scanning electron microscopy. J. Forensic Sci. 1998;43(2):417–422
  55. Sillen A, Hoering T. Chemical characterization of burnt bones from Swartkrans. In:  Brain CK editors. Swartkrans: A Cave's Chronicle of Early Man, Transvaal Museum Monograph 8. Pretoria: Transvaal Museum; 1993;p. 243–249
  56. Holden JL, Phakey PP, Clement JG. Scanning electron microscope observations of heat-treated human bone. Forensic Sci. Int. 1995;74:29–45
  57. Stiner MC, Kuhn SL, Weiner S, Bar-Yosef O. Differential burning, recrystallization, and fragmentation of archaeological bone. J. Archaeol. Sci. 1995;22:223–237
  58. Spennemann DHR, Colley SM. Fire in a pit: the effects of burning of faunal remains. Archaeozoologia. 1989;3:51–64
  59. Wilson DF, Massey W. Scanning electron microscopy of incinerated teeth. Am. J. Forensic Med. Pathol. 1987;8(1):32–38
  60. Walker PL, Miller KP. Time, temperature, and oxygen availability: an experimental study of the effects of environmental conditions on the color and organic content of cremated bone. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. Suppl. 2005;40:216–217
  61. Walker PL, Miller KWP, Richman R. Time, temperature, and oxygen availability: an experimental study of the effects of environmental conditions on the color and organic content of cremated bone. In:  Schmidt CW,  Symes SA editor. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains. London: Academic Press; 2008;p. 129–135
  62. Schmidt CW. The recovery and study of burned human teeth. In:  Schmidt CW,  Symes SA editor. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains. London: Academic Press; 2008;p. 55–74
  63. Beach JJ, Passalacqua NV, Chapman EN. Heat-related changes in tooth color: temperature versus duration of exposure. In:  Schmidt CW,  Symes SA editor. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains. London: Academic Press; 2008;p. 137–144
  64. Dunlop JM. Traffic light discoloration in cremated bones. Med. Sci. Law. 1978;18(3):163–173
  65. Devlin JB, Herrmann NP. Bone color as an interpretive tool of the depositional history of archaeological cremains. In:  Schmidt CW,  Symes SA editor. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains. London: Academic Press; 2008;p. 109–128
  66. Baby RS. Hopewell cremation practices. Ohio Hist. Soc., Papers Archaeol. 1954;1:1–17
  67. Binford LR. an analysis of cremations from three Michigan sites. Wisconsin Archaeol. 1963;44:98–110
  68. Thurman MD, Willmore LJ. A replicative cremation experiment. North Am. Archaeol. 1981;2(4):275–283
  69. Whyte TR. Distinguishing remains of human cremations from burned animal bones. J. Field Archaeol. 2001;28(3/4):437–448
  70. Sajantila A, Ström M, Budowle B, Karhunen PJ, Peltonen L. The polymerase chain reaction and post-mortem forensic identity testing: application of amplified D1S80 and HLA-DQα loci to the identification of fire victims. Forensic Sci. Int. 1991;51:23–34
  71. Brown KA, O’ Donoghue K, Brown TA. DNA in cremated bones from an early bronze age cemetery cairn. Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 1995;5:181–187
  72. Tsuchimochi T, Iwasa M, Maeno Y, Koyama H, Inoue H, Isobe I, et al. Chelating resin-based extraction of DNA from dental pulp and sex determination from incinerated teeth with Y-chromosomal alphoid repeat and short tandem repeats. Am. J. Forensic Med. Pathol. 2002;23(3):268–271
  73. Ye J, Ji A, Parra EJ, Zheng X, Jiang C, Zhao X, et al. A simple and efficient method for extracting DNA from old and burned bone. J. Forensic Sci. 2004;49(4):754–759
  74. Warren MW, Maples WR. The anthropometry of contemporary commercial cremation. J. Forensic Sci. 1997;42(3):417–423
  75. Bass WM, Jantz RL. Cremation weights in East Tennessee. J. Forensic Sci. 2004;49(5):901–904
  76. Carr RF, Barsley RE, Davenport WD. Postmortem examination of incinerated teeth with the scanning electron microscope. J. Forensic Sci. 1986;31(1):307–311
  77. Herrmann B, Grupe G. Trace element content in prehistoric cremated human remains. In:  Grupe G,  Herrmann B editor. Trace Elements in Environmental History: Proceedings of the Symposium from June 24th to 26th, 1987 at Gottingen. Germany: Springer-Verlag; 1988;p. 91–101
  78. Brooks TR, Bodkin TE, Potts GE, Smullen SA. Elemental analysis of human cremains using ICP-OES to classify legitimate and contaminated cremains. J. Forensic Sci. 2006;51(5):967–973
  79. Bush MA, Bush PJ, Miller RG. Detection and classification of composite resins in incinerated teeth for forensic purposes. J. Forensic Sci. 2006;51(3):636–642
  80. Brooks WE, Mora CG, Jackson JC, McGeehin JP, Hood DG. Coal and cremation at the Tschudi Burn, Chan Chan, Northern Peru. Archaeometry. 2008;50(3):495–515
  81. Ubelaker DH, Lowenstein JM, Hood DG. Use of solid-phase double-antibody radioimmunoassay to identify species from small skeletal fragments. J. Forensic Sci. 2004;49(5):924–929

PII: S0379-0738(08)00380-0

doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2008.09.019

Forensic Science International
Volume 183, Issue 1 , Pages 1-5, 10 January 2009

Article Tools