Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39325784›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Unravelling taphono-myths. First large-scale study of histotaphonomic changes and diagenesis in bone from modern surface depositions.

Eline M J Schotsmans, Barbara H Stuart, Tahlia J Stewart, Paul S Thomas, Justyna J Miszkiewicz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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.

Eline M J SchotsmansEnvironmental Futures Research Centre, School of Earth, Atmospheric and Life Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0084-2828
Barbara H StuartCentre for Forensic Science, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, Australia.
Tahlia J StewartSkeletal Biology and Forensic Anthropology Research Group, School of Archaeology and Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5831-4449
Paul S ThomasSchool of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6962-2121
Justyna J MiszkiewiczSkeletal Biology and Forensic Anthropology Research Group, School of Archaeology and Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of diagenetic alterations in bone microstructure ('histotaphonomy') as indicators of funerary treatment in the past and for post-mortem interval calculations in forensic cases has received increasing attention in the last decade. Studies have used histological changes to conclude in-situ decomposition, mummification, infanticide and post-mortem interval. There has been very little attempt to experimentally validate the links between decomposition, depositional conditions, time-since-death and microscopic changes in human bone so that meaningful interpretations of archaeological and forensic observations can be made. Here, we address this problem experimentally using the largest sample of human remains from anatomical donors and the longest-term deposition framework to date. This study tests one key assumption of histotaphonomy; that putrefaction during the early stages of decay is reflected in bone microanatomy and composition. Seventeen human donors and six pigs were deposited on the surface in a known Australian environment and left to decompose between 463 and 1238 days. All remains underwent all stages of decomposition reaching skeletonisation. Rib and femur samples were analysed using conventional histological methods and scanning electron microscopy, by applying the Oxford Histological Index, and examining collagen birefringence, microcracking and re- and de mineralisation. Biomolecular changes of the femoral samples were analysed using Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy. The results indicate that bioerosion in human bone does not occur due to putrefaction. There were no correlations between bone histology and the following variables: human vs pigs, season, primary vs secondary deposition, position, fresh vs frozen and time-since-deposition. Furthermore, no trends were observed between biomolecular changes and time-since-deposition. The study also shows that pigs cannot be used as substitutes for human remains for bone biodegradation research. This is the first, controlled, larger scale study of human remains providing a lack of support for a long-assumed relationship between putrefaction and bone histology bioerosion. Using bone degradation as an argument to prove putrefaction, in-situ decomposition and early taphonomic processes cannot be supported based on the experimental human data presented.

Indexed as

FemurAdultAgedAnimalsBone and BonesFemaleHumansMaleMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningMiddle AgedPostmortem ChangesRibsSpectroscopy, Fourier Transform InfraredSwine

Identifiers

PMID39325784
PMCPMC11426454

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.