nach oben

International Journal of Legal Medicine

Erschienen in:

01.09.2022 | Original Article

Comparison of DNA preservation between adult and non-adult ancient skeletons

verfasst von: Ariana Šuligoj, Sara Mesesnel, Tamara Leskovar, Eva Podovšovnik, Irena Zupanič Pajnič

Erschienen in: International Journal of Legal Medicine | Ausgabe 6/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Studies evaluating DNA preservation in non-adults, or comparing preservation in adults and non-adults, are very rare. This study compares the preservation of DNA in the skeletal remains of adults and non-adults. It compares the quality and quantity of DNA recovered from different skeletal elements of adults and non-adults, and from non-adults of different age classes. In addition, the preservation of DNA in males and females is compared. Bone DNA preservation was estimated by measuring nuclear DNA concentration and its degradation, and through STR typing success. The study analyzed 29 adult skeletons and 23 non-adult skeletons from the Ljubljana–Polje archeological site, dating from the seventeenth to nineteenth century, and up to four skeletal elements (petrous bone, femur, calcaneus, and talus) were included. After full demineralization extraction, the PowerQuant System and the PowerPlex ESI 17 Fast System (Promega) were used for qPCR and STR typing, respectively. The results showed that, among the four bone types analyzed, only the petrous bone proved to be a suitable source of DNA for STR typing of non-adult skeletal remains, and DNA yield is even higher than in the adult petrous bone, which can be attributed to the higher DNA degradation observed in the adult petrous bone. In adult skeletons, petrous bones and tali produced high STR amplification success and low DNA yield was observed in adult femurs. The results of this study are applicable for the sampling strategy in routine forensic genetics cases for solving identification cases, including badly preserved non-adult and also adult skeletons.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Andronowski JM, Mundorff AZ, Pratt IV, Davoren JM, Cooper DML (2017) Evaluating differential nuclear DNA yield rates and osteocyte numbers among human bone tissue types: a synchrotron radiation micro-CT approach. Forensic Sci Int Genet 28:211–218PubMedCrossRef

Antinick TC, Foran DR (2019) Intra- and inter-element variability in mitochondrial and nuclear DNA from fresh and environmentally exposed skeletal remains. J Forensic Sci 64:88–97PubMedCrossRef

Bello S (2005) The reciprocal effects of taphonomy, funerary practices and anatomical features on the state of preservation of human remains. Brit Archaeol Rep In 1383:1–10

Bello S, Andrews P (2006) The intrinsic pattern of preservation of human skeletons and its influence on the interpretation of funerary behaviours. In: Gowland R, Knüsel C (eds) Social archaeology of funerary remains. Oxbow Books Oxford, pp 1–13

Bello SM, Thomann A, Signoli M et al (2006) Age and sex bias in the reconstruction of past population structures. Am J Phys Anthropol 129:24–38PubMedCrossRef

Broman GE, Trotter M, Peterson RR (1958) The density of selected bones of the human skeleton. Am J Phys Anthropol 16:197–211CrossRef

Buckberry J (2000) Missing, presumed buried? Bone diagenesis and the under-representation of Anglo-Saxon children. Assemblage 5. Available at http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/assemblage/html/5/buckberr.html

Buckberry J (2018) Techniques for identifying the age and sex of children at death. In: Crawford S, Hadley D, Shepherds G (eds) The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Childhood Oxford Handbooks Collection. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 55–70. http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/assemblage/html/5/buckberr.html

Campos PF, Craig OE, Turner-Walker G, Peacock E, Willerslev E, Gilbert MTP (2012) DNA in ancient bone—where is it located and how should we extract Ann. Anat 194:7–16

10.

Carpenter J, Bithell J (2000) Bootstrap confidence intervals: when, which, what? A practical guide for medical statisticians. Statist Med 19:1141–1164CrossRef

11.

Chaplin RE. The study of animal bones from archaeological sites. Seminar Press Ltd., 1971, London, New York.

12.

Crawford S, Lewis C (2009) Childhood studies and the society for the study of childhood in the past. Childhood in the Past 1:5–16. https://doi.org/10.1179/cip.2009.1.1.5

13.

Čakar J, Džehverović M, Pilav A (2020) DNA analysis of thirty-eight years old stillborn’s skeletal remains in case of disputed maternity. Forensic Sci Int Genet 47:102294PubMedCrossRef

14.

DiCiccio TJ, Efron B (1996) Bootstrap Confidence Intervals. Stat Sci 3:189–228

15.

Djurić M, Djukić K, Milovanović P et al (2011) Representing children in excavated cemeteries: the intrinsic preservation factors. Antiquity 85:250–262CrossRef

16.

Edson SM, Ross JP, Coble MD et al (2004) Naming the dead—confronting the realities of rapid identification of degraded skeletal remains. Forensic Sci Review 16:63

17.

Emmons AL, Davoren J, DeBruyn JM, Mundorff AZ (2020) Inter and intra-individual variation in skeletal DNA preservation in buried remains. Forensic Sci Int Genet 44:102193PubMedCrossRef

18.

Ewing MM, Thompson JM, McLaren RS, Purpero VM, Thomas KJ, Dobrowski PA et al (2016) Human DNA quantification and sample assessment: developmental validation of the PowerQuant system. Forensic Sci Int Genet 23:166–177PubMedCrossRef

19.

Gabrovšek, M. (2017). 120-letnica posvetitve cerkve Device Marije v Polju. Župnija Ljubljana Polje

20.

Gamba C, Jones ER, Teasdale MD et al (2014) Genome flux and stasis in a five millennium transect of European prehistory. Nat Commun 5:5257. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms6257CrossRefPubMed

21.

Gardner MJ, Altman DG (1986) Confidence intervals rather than P values: estimation rather than hypothesis testing. Br Med J 292:746–750CrossRef

22.

Geršak ŽM, Zupanič Pajnič I, Črešnar M, Zupanc T (2019) Determination of DNA yield rates in six different skeletal elements in ancient bones. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Ser 7:120–122CrossRef

23.

Gonzalez A, Cannet C, Zvénigorosky V, Geraut A, Koch G et al (2020) The petrous bone: ideal substrate in legal medicine? Forensic Sci Int Genet. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102305CrossRefPubMed

24.

Gotherstrom A, Collins MJ, Angerbjorn A, Liden K (2002) Bone preservation and DNA amplification. Archaeometry 3:395–404CrossRef

25.

Guy H, Masset C, Baud CA (1997) Infant taphonomy. Int J Osteoarchaeol 7:221–229. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1212(199705)7:3%3c221::AID-OA338%3e3.0.CO;2-ZCrossRef

26.

Hansen HB, Damgaard PB, Margaryan A, Stenderup J, Lynneruo N, Willerslev E et al (2017) Comparing ancient DNA preservation in petrous bone and tooth cementum. PLoS ONE 12:e0170940PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

27.

Hedges REM, Millard AR (1995) Bones and groundwater: towards the modelling of diagenetic processes. J Archaeol Sci. 22:155–164. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1995.0017CrossRef

28.

Henderson J (1987) Factors determining the state of preservation of human remains. In: Andy B, N. GA, Janaway RC (eds) Death, decay, and reconstruction: approaches to archaeology and forensic science. Manchester University Press, Manchester, UK, p. 43–54.

29.

Hines DZC, Vennemeyer M, Amory S, Huel R, Hanson I, Katzmarzyk C, et al. (2014) Prioritizing sampling of bone and teeth for DNA analysis in commingled cases, in: B.J. Adams, J.E. Byrd (Eds.), Commingled Human Remains: Methods in Recovery, Analysis, and Identification, Elsevier Inc. 275–305.

30.

Hoppa R D, Vaupel J W. The Rostock Manifesto for paleodemography: the way from stage to age. Cambridge Studies in Biological and Evolutionary Anthropology, 2002:1–8.

31.

Inkret J, Podovšovnik E, Zupanc T, Haring G, Zupanič PI (2021) Intra-bone nuclear DNA variability in Second World War metatarsal and metacarpal bones. Int J Legal Med. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-021-02528-9CrossRefPubMed

32.

Işcan MY Steyn MM. (2013). The human skeleton in forensic medicine (3rd ed.). Charles C Thomas, p.182. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.22754

33.

Just RS, Loreille OM, Molto JE, Merriwether DA, Woodward SR, Matheson C et al (2011) Titanic’s unknown child: the critical role of the mitochondrial DNA coding region in a re-identification effort. Forensic Sci Int Genet 5:231–235PubMedCrossRef

34.

Kamp KA (2001) Where have all the children gone?: the archaeology of childhood. J Archaeol Method Th 8:1–34CrossRef

35.

Kaye TG, Gaugler G, Sawlowicz Z (2008) Dinosaurian soft tissues interpreted as bacterial biofilms. PLoS ONE 3:e2808PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

36.

Hermans, R. (2004). External Ear Imaging. In: Lemmerling, M., Kollias, S.S. (eds) Radiology of the Petrous Bone. Medical Radiology. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 15 - 30

37.

Kralick AE, Zemel BS (2020) Evolutionary perspectives on the developing skeleton and implications for lifelong health. Front Endocrinol 11:99. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2020.00099CrossRef

38.

Kulstein G, Hadrys T, Wiegand P (2018) As solid as a rock-comparison of CE- and MPS-based analyses of the petrosal bone as a source of DNA for forensic identification of challenging cranial bones. Int J Legal Med 132:13–24PubMedCrossRef

39.

Larsen CS (2002) Bioarchaeology: the lives and lifestyles of past people. J Archaeol Res 10:119–166. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015267705803CrossRef

40.

Lewis, M. (2006). The bioarchaeology of children. In The Bioarchaeology of Children: perspectives from biological and forensic anthropology (Cambridge Studies in Biological and Evolutionary Anthropology, p. 1–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511542473.001

41.

Lewis M (2018) Chapter 10—juvenile arthropathies, circulatory, and endocrine disorders. In: Lewis MBT-P of C (ed). Academic Press, San Diego, p. 245–265.

42.

Lillehammer G (2010) Archaeology of children Complutum 21:15–45

43.

Manifold BM (2010) The representation of non-adult skeletal elements recovered from British archaeological sites. Childhood in the Past 3:43–62. https://doi.org/10.1179/cip.2010.3.1.43CrossRef

44.

Manifold BM (2015) Skeletal preservation of children’s remains in the archaeological record. HOMO 66:520–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchb.2015.04.003CrossRefPubMed

45.

Mansour, S., Magnan, J., Haidar, H., Nicolas, K., Louryan, S. (2013). The temporal bone. In: comprehensive and clinical anatomy of the middle ear. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36967-4_1

46.

Markelj Kemperl M, Kokalj D, Smerke M, Jurovic M. (1999). Polje, kdo bo tebe ljubil --- : teh nasih petsto let. Druzina.

47.

Maynard LM, Guo SS, Chumlea WC et al (1998) Total-body and regional bone mineral content and areal bone mineral density in children aged 8–18 y: the Fels Longitudinal Study. Am J Clin Nutr 68:1111–1117. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/68.5.1111CrossRefPubMed

48.

Mays S (1992) Taphonomic factors in a human skeletal assemblage. Environ Archaeol 9:54–58

49.

Mays S, Elders J, Humphrey L, et al (2013) Science and the dead: a guideline for the destructive sampling of archaeological human remains for scientific analysis. English Heritage Publishing with the Advisory Panel on the Archaology of Burial in England, London, p. 3–5.

50.

Miloš A, Selmanović A, Smajlović L et al (2007) Success rates of nuclear short tandem repeat typing from different skeletal elements. Croatian Med J 48:486–493

51.

Misner LM, Halvorson AC, Dreier JL, Ubelaker DH, Foran DR (2009) The correlation between skeletal weathering and DNA quality and quantity. J Forensic Sci 54:822–828PubMedCrossRef

52.

Morild I, Hamre SS, Huel R, Parsons TJ (2015) Identification of missing Norwegian World War II soldiers, in Karelia Russia. J Forensic Sci 60:1104–1110PubMedCrossRef

53.

Morton RJ, Lord WD (2006) Taphonomy of child-sized remains: a study of scattering and scavenging in Virginia, USA. J Forensic Sci 51:475–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00134.xCrossRefPubMed

54.

Mundorff AZ, Bartelink EJ, Mar-Cash E (2009) DNA preservation in skeletal elements from the World Trade Center Disaster: recommendations for mass fatality management. J Forensic Sci 54:739–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01045.xCrossRefPubMed

55.

Mundorff A, Davoren JM (2014) Examination of DNA yield rates for different skeletal elements at increasing post mortem intervals. Forensic Sci Int Genet 8:55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2013.08.001CrossRefPubMed

56.

Nawrocki SP (1995) Taphonomic processes in historical cemeteries. In: Grauer AL (ed) Bodies of evidence: reconstructing history through skeletal analysis. Wiley-Liss, New York, pp 49–66

57.

Nielsen-Marsh C, Gernaey A, Turner-Walker G et al (2000) The chemical degradation of bones. In: Cox M, Mays S (eds) Human Osteology in Archaeology and Forensic Science. Greenwich Medical Media, London, pp 439–451

58.

Obal M, Zupanič Pajnič I, GornjakPogorelc B, Zupanc T (2019) Different skeletal elements as a source of DNA for genetic identification of Second World War victims. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Ser 7:27–29CrossRef

59.

Ordóñez, A. C., Rosa, M. M. A. de la, Lorenzo, R. I. F., Pérez, G. R., Reimers, C. E. G., & Brito, J. J. P. (2015). Use of molecular genetic procedures for sex determination in “Guanches” children’s remains. In M. Sánchez Romero, E. Alarcón García, & G. Aranda Jiménez (Eds.), Children, spaces and identity (p. 218–229). Oxbow Books.

60.

Ossowski A, Kuś M, Brzeziński P, Prüffer J, Piątek J, Zielińska G (2013) Example of human individual identification from World War II gravesite. Forensic Sci Int 233:179–192PubMedCrossRef

61.

Pääbo S, Poinar H, Serre D, Jaenicke-Després V, Hebler J, Rohland N et al (2004) Genetic analyses from ancient DNA. Annu Rev Genet 38:645–679PubMedCrossRef

62.

Parker C, Rohrlach AB, Friederich S et al (2020) A systematic investigation of human DNA preservation in medieval skeletons. Sci Rep 10:18225. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75163-wCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

63.

Parsons TJ, Huel RML, Bajunović Z, Rizvić A (2019) Large scale DNA identification: the ICMP experience. Forensic Sci Int Genet 38:236–244PubMedCrossRef

64.

Parson W, Gusmão L, Hares DR, Irwin JA, Mayr WR, Morling N et al (2014) DNA Commission of the International Society for Forensic Genetics: Revised and extended guidelines for mitochondrial DNA typing. Forensic Sci Int Genet 13:134–142PubMedCrossRef

65.

Pilli E, Vai S, Caruso MG, D’Errico G, Berti A, Caramelli D (2018) Neither femur nor tooth: petrous bone for identifying archaeological bone samples via forensic approach. Forensic Sci Int 283:144–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2017.12.023CrossRefPubMed

66.

Pinhasi R, Fernandes D, Sirak K, Novak M, Connell S, Alpaslan-Roodenberg S et al (2015) Optimal ancient DNA yields from the inner ear part of the human petrous bone. PLoS ONE 10:e0129102PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

67.

Prinz M, Carracedo A, Mayr WR et al (2007) DNA Commission of the International Society for Forensic Genetics (ISFG): Recommendations regarding the role of forensic genetics for disaster victim identification (DVI). Forensic Sci Int Genet 1:3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2006.10.003CrossRefPubMed

68.

Promega Corporation. PowerPlex ESI 17 Fast System for use on the Applied Biosystems Genetic Analyzers. 2017, Madison, WI.

69.

Promega Corporation (2020) PowerQuant system technical manual. Madison

70.

Qiagen Companies. EZ1&2 DNA Investigator Handbook. 2021, Hilden.

71.

Rauch F, Schoenau E (2001) The developing bone: slave or master of its cells and molecules? Pediat Res 2001(50):309–314CrossRef

72.

Robling AG, Castillo AB, Turner CH (2006) Biomechanical and molecular regulation of bone remodeling. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 8:455–498. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.bioeng.8.061505.095721CrossRefPubMed

73.

Rohland N, Hofreiter M (2007) Ancient DNA extraction from bones and teeth. Nat Protoc 2:1756PubMedCrossRef

74.

Rothe J, Melisch C, Powers N, Geppert M, Zander J, Purps J et al (2015) Genetic research at a fivefold children’s burial from medieval Berlin. Forensic Sci Int Genet 15:90–97PubMedCrossRef

75.

Saunders SR, Barrans L. (1999) What can be done about the infant category in skeletal samples? Camb S Bio Evol Anthr. 183–209.

76.

Scheuer L, Black SM (2000) Developmental juvenile osteology. Academic, London, p IX–X. https://archive.org/details/developmentaljuv0000sche

77.

Shea JJ (2006) Child’s play: reflections on the invisibility of children in the Paleolithic record. Evol Anthropol Issues, News, and Reviews: Issues, News, and Reviews 15:212–216CrossRef

78.

Sirak KA, Fernandes DM, Cheronet O et al (2017) A minimally-invasive method for sampling human petrous bones from the cranial base for ancient DNA analysis. Biotechniques 62:283–289. https://doi.org/10.2144/000114558CrossRefPubMed

79.

Siriboonpiputtana T, Rinthachai T, Shotivaranon J et al (2018) Forensic genetic analysis of bone remain samples. Forensic Sci Int 284:167–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2017.12.045CrossRefPubMed

80.

Stojanowski CM, Seidemann RM, Doran GH (2002) Differential skeletal preservation at Windover Pond: causes and consequences. Am J Phys Anthropol The Official Publication of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists 119:15–26

81.

Tierney SN, Bird JM (2015) Molecular sex identification of juvenile skeletal remains from an Irish medieval population using ancient DNA analysis. J Archaeol Sci 62:27–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2015.06.016CrossRef

82.

von Endt DW, Ortner DJ (1984) Experimental effects of bone size and temperature on bone diagenesis. J Archaeol Sci 11:247–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-4403(84)90005-0CrossRef

83.

Vrhovec, I. (1903). Zgodovina šentpeterske fare v Ljubljani. Slovenska matica.

84.

Waldron T (1987) The relative survival of the human skeleton: implications for palaeopathology. In: Boddington A, Garland AN, Janaway RC (eds) Death, Decay, and Reconstruction: Approaches to Archaeology and Forensic Science. Manchester University Press, Manchester, pp 55–64

85.

Walker PL, Johnson JR, Lambert PM (1988) Age and sex biases in the preservation of human skeletal remains. Am J Phys Anthropol 1988(76):183–188CrossRef

86.

Watherston J, McNevin D, Gahan ME, Bruce D, Ward J (2018) Current and emerging tools for the recovery of genetic information from post mortem samples: new directions for disaster victim identification. Forensic Sci Int Genet 37:270–282PubMedCrossRef

87.

Weiss KM, Wobst HM (1973) Demographic models for anthropology. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology i–186. https://openlibrary.org/books/OL4955237M/Demographic_models_for_anthropology

88.

Wells JCK (2007) Sexual dimorphism of body composition. Best Pract ResCl En 21:415–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beem.2007.04.007CrossRef

89.

Willey P, Galloway A, Snyder L (1997) Bone mineral density and survival of elements and element portions in the bones of the Crow Creek massacre victims. Am J Phys Anthropol: The Official Publication of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists 104:513–528CrossRef

90.

Zapata J, Pérez-Sirvent C, Martínez-Sánchez MJ, Tovar P (2006) Diagenesis, not biogenesis: two late Roman skeletal examples. Sci Total Environ 369:357–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2006.05.021CrossRefPubMed

91.

Zupanc T, Zupanič Pajnič I, Podovšovnik E, Obal M (2021) High DNA yield from metatarsal and metacarpal bones from Slovenian Second World War skeletal remains. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 102426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102426

92.

Zupanič Pajnič I (2016) Extraction of DNA from human skeletal material. In: Goodwin W (ed), Forensic DNA typing protocols, methods in molecular biology, vol 1420. Springer Science&Business Media, LLC, New York. pp 89–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3597-0_7

93.

Zupanič PI (2020) Genetic analysis of skeletal remains of war victims. Rom J Leg Med 28:40–49CrossRef

94.

Zupanič Pajnič I (2020b) Analyses of Second World War skeletal remains using a forensic approach, in: Shrivastava P (Ed), et al. Forensic DNA typing : principles, applications and advancements. 153–179, Springer, Singapore. https://link.springer.com/chapter/ doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6655-4_8.

95.

Zupanič PI (2021) Identification of a Slovenian prewar elite couple killed in the Second World War. Forensic Sci Int 327:110994CrossRef

96.

ZupaničPajnič I, Inkret J, Zupanc T, Podovšovnik E (2021) Comparison of nuclear DNA yield and STR typing success in Second World War petrous bones and metacarpals III. Forensic Sci Int Genet 55:102578CrossRef

97.

ZupaničPajnič I, Gornjak-Pogorelc B, Balažic J (2010) Molecular genetic identification of skeletal remains from the Second world war Konfin I mass grave in Slovenia. Int J Legal Med 124:307–317CrossRef

98.

ZupaničPajnič I, Obal M, Zupanc T (2020) Identifying victims of the largest Second World War family massacre in Slovenia. Forensic Sci Int 306:110056CrossRef

99.

ZupaničPajnič I, Petaros A, Balažic J, Geršak K (2016) Searching for the mother missed since the Second World War. J Forensic Leg Med 44:138–142CrossRef

100.

ZupaničPajnič I, Zupanc T, Balažic J, Geršak ŽM, Stojković O, Skadrić I et al (2017) Prediction of autosomal STR typing success in ancient and Second World War bone samples. Forensic Sci Int Genet 27:17–26CrossRef

Titel: Comparison of DNA preservation between adult and non-adult ancient skeletons
verfasst von: Ariana Šuligoj
Sara Mesesnel
Tamara Leskovar
Eva Podovšovnik
Irena Zupanič Pajnič
Publikationsdatum: 01.09.2022
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: International Journal of Legal Medicine / Ausgabe 6/2022
Print ISSN: 0937-9827
Elektronische ISSN: 1437-1596
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-022-02881-3

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Comparison of DNA preservation between adult and non-adult ancient skeletons

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Rechtsmedizin

Molekularpathologische Untersuchungen im Wandel der Zeit

Vergleichende Pathologie in der onkologischen Forschung

Gastrointestinale Stromatumoren

Personalisierte Medizin in der Onkologie

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2022

Quantifying the potential of morphological parameters for human dental identification: part 3—selecting the strongest skeletal identifiers in the mandible

Cuticular hydrocarbons for the identification and geographic assignment of empty puparia of forensically important flies

Use of hormone-specific antibody probes for differential labeling of contributor cell populations in trace DNA mixtures

Single-cell transcriptome study in forensic medicine: prospective applications

A standard protocol for the analysis of postmortem muscle protein degradation: process optimization and considerations for the application in forensic PMI estimation

Sex discrimination from urine traces for forensic purposes using attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy and multivariate data analysis

Neu im Fachgebiet Rechtsmedizin

Molekularpathologische Untersuchungen im Wandel der Zeit

Vergleichende Pathologie in der onkologischen Forschung

Gastrointestinale Stromatumoren

Personalisierte Medizin in der Onkologie