Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36353312›Full record

ArticleForensic sciences research2022

Identification of a decedent in a 103-year-old homicide case using forensic anthropology and genetic genealogy.

Amy R Michael, Samantha H Blatt, Mariyam Isa, Anthony Redgrave, Douglas H Ubelaker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Forensic sciences research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Amy R MichaelDepartment of Anthropology, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3746-3087
Samantha H BlattDepartment of Anthropology, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4527-9335
Mariyam IsaDepartment of Anthropology, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8442-7623
Anthony RedgraveRedgrave Research Forensic Services, Orange, CA, USA.
Douglas H UbelakerDepartment of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8027-2919

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anthropologists are often the custodians of long-term unidentified human remains though their positions as curators of university or museum skeletal collections. Various factors decrease the solvability of these legacy cases including the passage of time, the loss of provenience for specific cases, and lack of documentation or case records. While anthropologists can contribute important information toward identification, it is often necessary to explore novel and cross-disciplinary strategies to resolve difficult cold cases. In long cold cases, the postmortem interval, in particular, may be difficult to estimate leading to further challenges in achieving identification. Modern advances in radiocarbon bomb pulse dating, isotope analysis, and actualistic studies have contributed to positive identification of unidentified human remains in some legacy cases, but may not be available to all forensic practitioners and law enforcement from resource-poor agencies. Pooling resources, as well as collaborating with professionals outside of forensic anthropology, is a useful strategy to pursue when anthropological methods are exhausted.The case study presented here demonstrates a collaborative approach between forensic anthropologists, forensic genetic genealogists, and law enforcement in a century-old homicide. The dismembered and mummified parts of a male body were recovered in a remote cave in 1979 and again in 1991. Despite forensic anthropologists creating and updating the biological profile over the decades from recovery to present, no identification was made until the application of forensic genetic genealogy (FGG) to the case in 2019. New interpretations of bone microstructure and trauma analysis are presented for the case, alongside the historical documentation and "proof of life" evidence used by the genealogy team. A review of the FGG methods underscores the challenges in this case (e.g. significant endogamy, multiple aliases used by the victim) and the steps taken toward resolution. Ultimately, a combined anthropology and genealogy approach resulted in a confirmed identity for a man who was murdered in 1916.Key pointsForensic scientists should leverage a collaborative, interdisciplinary approach toward human identification.When combined with forensic anthropology methods, forensic genetic genealogy is a valuable tool linking biological and cultural-historical aspects of identity.Forensic anthropologists should review challenging cases in their labs as new methods are introduced and new resources become available.

Indexed as

cold caseforensic genetic genealogyForensic sciences; forensic anthropologyhuman identificationinvestigative genetic genealogypostmortem intervalskeletal trauma

Identifiers

PMID36353312
PMCPMC9639526

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.