Introduction In the intricate realm of forensic investigations, unraveling the enigmatic tales woven into skeletal remains presents a formidable challenge. Fortunately, the multifaceted discipline of forensic anthropology emerges as an invaluable ally, equipping investigators with a potent arsenal of techniques to unravel the mysteries enshrouding human remains. This article delves into the…

@bliss-bliss-bliss-bliss you got the spirit of scoring: looking at some specific aspects of the bones that are used as sex indicators, then estimating if they fall more on the F side of things, on the M, the degree to which they are F and M, or whether they are in the exact middle. Then you consider all the different traits together to estimate the sex of the bone, and then all the bones together to give a final estimate for the skeleton. Not all bones are sex indicators (phalanges, are useless in this regard, for example) and some of them are more reliable than others (the pelvis wins over the mandible), so you have to keep that in mind (also single traits are more reliable than others so that is an ulterior complication yay!). Another thing that can complicate the process (aside from fragmentation or absence of bones) is that most of the traits have to be scored on the basis of morphology, which is to some extent described subjectively. For example, one of the traits of the cranium is the supraorbital margin (the upper margin of your eyesocket), which is sharper in females than in males. So you have to look at something and be like "ok so is this sharp? How sharp it is?" and then score it and...yeah, you need experience and references to know when something is sharper than something else. That's also why there are guides about this sort of thing and plastic casts. I can get more in-depth about the traits that are used for each bone, but it is a lot and it varies slightly depending on methods. To give you an idea, this is an image from "Recommendations for age and sex diagnoses of skeletons. (1980). Journal of Human Evolution, 9(7), 517,IN1,533-532,IN3,549". These are some (not even all!) of the characteristics used in the WEA method, which is quite old and was critiqued in some regards (but it is still used sometimes).

I was looking for the cool cranium pics, but I can't find them right now, so here, have an os coxa. Now, in the drawing, the differences are very clear, but as you can imagine reality is not going to play by idealisation rules. Some os coxa fit the picture perfectly, most don't and you have to deal with it.

The last thing that I want to mention, scoring methods exist also for age and age estimation is also an important part of the skeletal analysis. Age is really useful to create categories and plays an important role in many many different areas of research, from pathologies to activity and occupation, to societal structures and roles. However, I have yet to see someone try to restrict access to fundamental medical cures and nursing homes on the basis that "yOu dON't hAve tHe rIghT sk5leTal Bi0loGicaL struCtUrE!" and "you aRe deNyinG tHe orDer 0f NatuRe if YoU sAy tHat skEleTal aGe InDicaTorS aRe n0t str8fOrwArd aNd tHat th5re iS m0Re tHan 0Ne wAy tO be Old!1!1"

UF human identification laboratory full of skulls offers insight into cold cases

by Kelcee Griffis

"Skulls seem to be in vogue at the C.A. Pound Human Identification Laboratory.The director, Michael Warren, wears a small orange-and-blue skull pin on his sport jacket lapel: an adaptation of the division’s logo.Behind his desk, a little metal skeleton plays a guitar. By his computer, there’s a black box with bony, grinning faces etched into the wood.

And down the hallway, there’s an entire room filled with skulls. Some are charred, broken, sliced in half. They’re scattered across five long worktables, grouped into skeletons with various bones atop brown paper and white foam. It’s far from being a morbid obsession with death. The UF professor and graduate students who run this lab are professionals who have analyzed evidence in some of the most high-profile cases in the state. The clues they find through skeletal examination often unlock the stories of how people died and can ultimately provide the information necessary to solve missing persons cases.

The lab is tucked at the back of UF's Cancer and Genetics Research Complex. Its unassuming and nearly unmarked entrance looks like a loading dock. Fluorescent lights stripe the ceiling. Red evidence tape rolls lay among the bones and manila files. Ten small, glass bottles filled halfway with what looks like whiskey contain 10 severed fingers. On a side table sit two shallow dishes filled with gray sand — cremation ashes. Warren sifts through one of the dishes to reveal small, shiny pellets. That’s evidence of surgical operations, he says. In the narrow, metallic room Warren says is used for “separating the soft tissue from the bones,” a 7-or-so-foot-long table takes center stage. The stainless-steel top is like a tray several inches deep. But the room isn’t only used for serious casework — occasionally, the graduate students get to do educational projects there.

To demonstrate, Warren snaps on rubber gloves. He takes the lid off of a large trash can next to the dissection table and plunges his hands into the murky depths of solution. He comes up with the entire severed arm of a gorilla. Everything is perfectly intact, including the oily black fur and 2-inch fingernails, until the upper arm. Skin and tissue are flapping where it’s been sliced open and dissected to various levels. A male gorilla died at the Jacksonville Zoo, and Warren’s students are using it to learn about the human body because the two systems are so similar. A small window into the walk-in freezer shows what looks like a grocery store meat locker with squishy, brown and bloody matter stacked in plastic bags. Families, Warren explains, don’t want the tissue. They want the clean bones of their loved ones to bury. The lab incinerates the tissue, and a biohazard truck comes once a week in the wee hours of the morning to whisk the waste away" (read more).

Microscopic Analysis of Sharp Force Trauma in Bone and Cartilage: A Validation Study

Christian Crowder Ph.D., Christopher W. Rainwater M.S., Jeannette S. Fridie M.A.

Sharp force trauma research lacks agreement on reported error rates for correctly identifying toolmark characteristics on bone and cartilage. This study provides error rates for determining blade class (serrated, partially serrated, nonserrated) and type of edge bevel (left, right, even). Three analysts examined cuts to a wax medium, cartilage, and bone using two types of microscopes. Additionally, the observers examined impressions taken from the wax medium and the cartilage. Overall, a total of 504 observations were performed. Serrated blades were distinguishable from nonserrated blades due to their patterned striations. Some difficulties were encountered in distinguishing serrated and partially serrated blades; however, when these groups were considered together as one classification type (serrated), classification accuracy improved from 79% to 96%. Classification accuracy for edge bevel was 65%. Error rates were similar when comparing direct observation of the cut marks versus indirect observation (impressions). Additionally, the type of microscope used did not affect error rates.

Discussion

Serrated blades were generally distinguishable from nonserrated blades due to their distinct, patterned striations. Error rates were low and generally corresponded to the experience level of the observer suggesting additional training could further reduce error. Partially serrated blades can be problematic as the signature left behind on the bone or cartilage is dependent on the portion of the blade impacting the material as well as the overall contact area. Additionally, there may also be a discrepancy as to when a particular blade would be considered partially serrated (i.e., if only a short portion of the blade exhibits partial serration). The authors therefore suggest analysts choose their wording carefully when submitting reports and consider using phrases such as “an impact with a serrated blade or blade portion” instead of “an impact with a serrated blade.” The same is true for the determination of an impact with a nonserrated blade.

The angle of the impact of the blade is the most influential aspect of the distance between striations left by blade teeth. As the blade moves, the angle of the blade will change, and as a result, the distance between the striations will also change; serrated blades, however, will still produce patterned striations despite these changes in movement, whereas nonserrated blades will produce fine striations that are unpatterned, if visible at all. Thus, it is the pattern of the striations that are important, not the distance.

Additionally, the other incorrect classifications are also particularly informative. Figure 3 shows a cut cartilage from one of the two serrated blades that were incorrectly classified as a nonserrated blade impact. With the serrations being so far apart, there is less potential for striations to be left on the material. In addition, the rounded, scalloped appearance of the serrations may not leave the same marks as typically pointed, sharp teeth of serrated blades. Thus, the distance between serrations, the morphology of the serrations, and the amount of tissue impacted will affect the ability to perform the analysis.

Edge bevel was much more easily distinguished in the casting wax than the bone. One possibility for this is the construction of the wax blocks. The cuts on the rectangular wax blocks were made on a flat surface and the resulting kerf may have been more easily observed from the block rather than the rounded, irregular surfaces of the bone samples. Overall, assessment of blade bevel produced poor results. The bevel angle or degrees of the bevel angle may vary depending on the type of knife (e.g., kitchen vs. sporting knife), which could impact edge bevel classification. This study did not evaluate the degree of edge bevel for each knife; therefore, future research should consider this and determine whether degree of edge bevel correlates to classification accuracy.

During the assessment of edge bevel, two other features were noted in relatively low frequencies on the specimens: Exit scraping was occasionally noted on the side of the bone that individual was standing when the cut was made (Fig. 2). This is expressed as a superficial groove that is likely the result of the blade falling out of the kerf and was always noted on the handle side of the cut. Several bones also exhibit kerf margin deformation where a buildup of ragged, deformed bone appears along the kerf margin (Fig. 2). In serrated blades, this feature was noted on the side of the kerf that corresponded to the side of the edge bevel of the blade. In nonserrated blades, kerf margin deformation was noted but was not consistently associated with the side of edge bevel. In most cases, the amount of deformation seen in serrated blades was greater than that seen in nonserrated blades, which may be associated with the size or spacing of the scallops (serrations) in the blade. With more experimental research, these features may assist future researchers attempting to distinguish the side of edge bevel.

Osteoware is a Free Tool for Researchers

Osteoware is an easy to learn software program designed to assist in the documentation of human skeletal remains.  It provides for the real-time data entry of quantitative and qualitative observations into a structured query language (SQL) relational database.  When the database is established on a networked server up to five individuals may enter data at the same time, though not on the same record.

Key Features

A free software program for documenting human skeletal remains.

Easy to learn and intuitive graphic user interface.

Incorporates the Buikstra & Ubelaker “Standards” with many expansions.

Real-time data entry of quantitative and qualitative observations.

Up to five individuals may enter data on a networked server.

Powerful structured query language (SQL) for meta-analyses.

Complete Osteoware User Manual PDF’s and online community support forum.

While Osteoware incorporates the Buikstra & Ubelaker (1994) “Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains”, we recognize that other guidelines exist for recording osteological data.  In fact each researcher likely has a specialized set of variables specific to their own research needs; however, having a common set of core observations is key to establishing comparisons among skeletal collections documented by different people.  Osteoware provides an intuitive data entry system that prompts users to collect these core observations.

The Osteoware software, educational website, online support forum, and the User Manual are works in progress with future modules and features now in development.

A trove of skulls and other body parts unearthed in the heart of London may have once belonged to Roman gladiators, war captives or criminals, a new study suggests.