28天后:从浸泡在腐蚀性家用化学品中的人类遗体中提取DNA。

Jennifer Snedeker, Rachel Houston, Sheree Hughes
{"title":"28天后:从浸泡在腐蚀性家用化学品中的人类遗体中提取DNA。","authors":"Jennifer Snedeker, Rachel Houston, Sheree Hughes","doi":"10.1111/1556-4029.15682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Aggressive chemicals intended for cleaning pools or unclogging drains contain high concentrations of dangerous compounds, leading to their nefarious use in dissolving human remains in some criminal cases. The use of these readily accessible household cleaners to destroy human remains and hide evidence of a crime presents a considerable challenge for human identification. However, research on the success of recovering DNA from such remains is limited. Therefore, we investigated the effects of submerging partial human remains (including whole heads, forearms, and hands) in five different household products: bleach, Rid-X® septic treatment, lye drain opener, sulfuric acid drain opener, and muriatic acid (hydrochloric acid) pool cleaner. We evaluated the impact of each chemical, focusing on visual changes, DNA recovery, and the potential for successful human identification through traditional STR or mitochondrial DNA analyses. Exposure to all chemicals altered the appearance of the remains, but DNA recovery was still possible across various time periods, up to 28 days. Human remains exposed to bleach, Rid-X®, and lye produced full STR profiles after 4 weeks. Sulfuric acid shortened this time to 3 weeks, while hydrochloric acid, the most damaging chemical, limited full STR profile recovery to just the first 3 days of exposure. This study demonstrates that although differences in the rate of damage occur depending on the amount of tissue introduced, volume of chemical used, and the specific chemical of choice, DNA-based human identification of remains treated with everyday household cleaners is likely, particularly if bone fragments are recovered.</p>","PeriodicalId":94080,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Twenty-eight days later: The recovery of DNA from human remains submerged in aggressive household chemicals.\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer Snedeker, Rachel Houston, Sheree Hughes\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1556-4029.15682\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Aggressive chemicals intended for cleaning pools or unclogging drains contain high concentrations of dangerous compounds, leading to their nefarious use in dissolving human remains in some criminal cases. The use of these readily accessible household cleaners to destroy human remains and hide evidence of a crime presents a considerable challenge for human identification. However, research on the success of recovering DNA from such remains is limited. Therefore, we investigated the effects of submerging partial human remains (including whole heads, forearms, and hands) in five different household products: bleach, Rid-X® septic treatment, lye drain opener, sulfuric acid drain opener, and muriatic acid (hydrochloric acid) pool cleaner. We evaluated the impact of each chemical, focusing on visual changes, DNA recovery, and the potential for successful human identification through traditional STR or mitochondrial DNA analyses. Exposure to all chemicals altered the appearance of the remains, but DNA recovery was still possible across various time periods, up to 28 days. Human remains exposed to bleach, Rid-X®, and lye produced full STR profiles after 4 weeks. Sulfuric acid shortened this time to 3 weeks, while hydrochloric acid, the most damaging chemical, limited full STR profile recovery to just the first 3 days of exposure. This study demonstrates that although differences in the rate of damage occur depending on the amount of tissue introduced, volume of chemical used, and the specific chemical of choice, DNA-based human identification of remains treated with everyday household cleaners is likely, particularly if bone fragments are recovered.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94080,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of forensic sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of forensic sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.15682\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.15682","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

用于清洁水池或疏通下水道的腐蚀性化学品含有高浓度的危险化合物,导致它们在一些刑事案件中被邪恶地用于溶解人体遗骸。使用这些随手可得的家用清洁剂来销毁人类遗骸和隐藏犯罪证据,对人类身份鉴定提出了相当大的挑战。然而,从这些遗骸中成功提取DNA的研究是有限的。因此,我们研究了将部分人体遗骸(包括整个头部、前臂和手)浸泡在五种不同的家用产品中的效果:漂白剂、Rid-X®化脓剂、碱液排水器、硫酸排水器和盐酸(盐酸)泳池清洁剂。我们评估了每种化学物质的影响,重点关注视觉变化、DNA恢复以及通过传统STR或线粒体DNA分析成功进行人类鉴定的潜力。暴露在所有化学物质中都会改变遗体的外观,但DNA在不同的时间段内仍然可以恢复,最长可达28天。人类遗骸暴露于漂白剂,Rid-X®和碱液4周后产生完整的STR谱。硫酸将这一时间缩短至3周,而最具破坏性的化学物质盐酸将整个STR剖面的恢复限制在暴露后的前3天。这项研究表明,尽管损伤率的不同取决于引入的组织数量、使用的化学物质的体积和所选择的特定化学物质,但用日常家用清洁剂处理过的遗骸的dna人类鉴定是可能的,特别是如果骨头碎片被恢复的话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Twenty-eight days later: The recovery of DNA from human remains submerged in aggressive household chemicals.

Aggressive chemicals intended for cleaning pools or unclogging drains contain high concentrations of dangerous compounds, leading to their nefarious use in dissolving human remains in some criminal cases. The use of these readily accessible household cleaners to destroy human remains and hide evidence of a crime presents a considerable challenge for human identification. However, research on the success of recovering DNA from such remains is limited. Therefore, we investigated the effects of submerging partial human remains (including whole heads, forearms, and hands) in five different household products: bleach, Rid-X® septic treatment, lye drain opener, sulfuric acid drain opener, and muriatic acid (hydrochloric acid) pool cleaner. We evaluated the impact of each chemical, focusing on visual changes, DNA recovery, and the potential for successful human identification through traditional STR or mitochondrial DNA analyses. Exposure to all chemicals altered the appearance of the remains, but DNA recovery was still possible across various time periods, up to 28 days. Human remains exposed to bleach, Rid-X®, and lye produced full STR profiles after 4 weeks. Sulfuric acid shortened this time to 3 weeks, while hydrochloric acid, the most damaging chemical, limited full STR profile recovery to just the first 3 days of exposure. This study demonstrates that although differences in the rate of damage occur depending on the amount of tissue introduced, volume of chemical used, and the specific chemical of choice, DNA-based human identification of remains treated with everyday household cleaners is likely, particularly if bone fragments are recovered.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Documentation, investigation, and disclosure of contamination events. Examination of customized questioned digital documents. Redefining the documentation of outdoor surface scatter scenes using geographic information systems. Sampling techniques and genomic analysis of biological material from artworks. Impact of bifenthrin and clothianidin on blow fly (Diptera: Calliphoridae) oviposition patterns under laboratory and field conditions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1