Chapter 37 Heavy Minerals in Forensic Science

Palenik, Skip

doi:10.1016/s0070-4571(07)58037-4

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The insurance company suspected that the switch had taken place in Genoa but needed to be certain in order to decide who was responsible for covering the risk. The soil was subjected to petrographic and chemical examinations after separating the components of the soil into fractioning and analyzing them by appropriate methods 2 . The results of these examinations proved to the satisfaction of the parties involved that the soil had come from Canada and could not have originated from Genoa.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Utilization of Microscopy in Developing Investigative Leads from the Examination of Microscopic Trace Evidence in Forensic Investigations

Palenik

2016

Microsc Microanal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The majority of trace evidence examinations, performed in laboratories of forensic science throughout the world, are of a comparative nature. Questioned (Q) items of evidence (e.g., fibers, hair, glass, paint, soil) from a crime scene (or victim, suspect, location, etc.) are compared to suspected items of known (K) origin to determine the likelihood that the K and Q items could have originated from the same source. The justification normally invoked for performing these comparisons is Locard's Exchange Principle, which states that whenever two objects come into contact there is a transfer of material between them. The original research into the analysis of dust traces, which led Nickolls 1 in 1956 to recognize and name this principle, was performed by Edmond Locard between 1910 and 1965. Since then, this principle has been repeatedly validated by means of published research and casework. The research reports describe the results of transfer experiments, most often with fibers, performed by forensic scientists from around the world. The results of these experiments have all confirmed Locard's original premise. Published casework reports also confirm the utility and value of microscopic traces in demonstrating contact between individuals, vehicles, sites, etc., to events in question, even when no eye witnesses were present to give testimony.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Utilization of Microscopy in Developing Investigative Leads from the Examination of Microscopic Trace Evidence in Forensic Investigations

Palenik

2016

Microsc Microanal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dilute (5%) aqueous alcohol solutions are routinely used in soil separation methods in our laboratory and are recommended for deflocculation during settling velocity separations .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A New Method for the Removal and Analysis of Small Particles Adhering to Carpet Fiber Surfaces,,

Bowen

Stoney

2013

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fibers are a commonly encountered evidence type and fiber comparisons are routinely conducted. When the characteristics of questioned and known fibers correspond, the probative value is limited because the characteristics compared are determined by their manufacture. It would be valuable to test the hypothesis that questioned fibers originated from a specific carpet. One means of testing this is to analyze fine particles on the fibers. A procedure was developed for removing adhering particles from fibers and preparing them for scanning electron microscopy/ energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry (SEM/EDS) analysis. The efficacy of several fluids (acetone, ethanol, hexanes, aqueous ethanol, aqueous sodium hexametaphosphate) and agitation methods (sonication and vortexing) for removing particles from fibers was evaluated. The most effective method evaluated was sonication in ethanol for 10 min. The recovered particles were filtered onto a polycarbonate filter and analyzed by automated SEM/EDS analysis to generate data on the particle assemblage. This method makes possible future research to test the within-item and between-item variability of particle assemblages on fibers.

show abstract

“…Soil is a valuable material when submitted to forensic crime laboratories as trace evidence because it is highly variable (e.g., color, mineralogy, and texture), easily transferred during a commission of a crime due to its microscopic size, and often overlooked as evidence by perpetrators [1][2][3][4]. Forensic geologists that examine soil evidence can be asked to answer a number of questions; however, the most common questions are related to sample-to-sample comparisons (e.g., comparing soil from the suspect's shoes to the crime scene soil) and provenance (or sample origin; e.g., where in the United States did the soil originate?).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Forensic geologists have identified several approaches for removing soil from evidence, including hand picking with forceps, scraping, the use of adhesive tape, vacuuming, swabbing, and washing [4,6,7]. The Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science Trace Evidence Subcommittee developed a standard (ASTM E3272-21) to guide the collection of soil for criminal investigations [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing three soil removal methods for environmental DNA analysis of mock forensic geology evidence

Tiedge,

Meiklejohn

2023

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil is useful in criminal investigations as it is highly variable and readily transferred. Forensic geologists use several different techniques to removal soil from evidence prior to the analysis of inorganic components. There has been recent interest from the forensic science community to analyze environmental deoxyribonucleic acid (eDNA) associated with soil to augment existing forensic analyses. Notably however, limited research has been conducted to compare commonly used soil removal methods for downstream eDNA analysis. In this study, three soil removal methods were assessed: picking/scraping, sonication, and swabbing. Three mock evidence types (t‐shirts, boot soles, and trowels) were sampled in triplicate with each removal method (n = 27). Soil samples underwent DNA isolation, quantification, and amplification of four genomic barcode regions: 16S for bacteria, ITS1 for fungi, ITS2 for plants, and COI for arthropods. Amplicons were prepared into libraries for DNA sequencing on an Illumina® MiniSeq. DNA concentrations were highest in picked/scraped samples and were statistically significant compared with swabbed and sonicated samples. Amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) were identified, and removal methods had no impact on the recovery of the total number of target ASVs. Additionally, when assessing each sample in multidimensional space, picked/scraped samples tended to cluster separately from swabbed and sonicated samples. The soil core used a reference in this study also clustered with the picked/scraped samples, indicating that these samples may be more reflective of the communities collected from soil cores. Based on these data, we identified that picking/scraping is an acceptable soil removal method for eDNA analysis.

show abstract

Chapter 37 Heavy Minerals in Forensic Science

Cited by 9 publications

References 4 publications

The Utilization of Microscopy in Developing Investigative Leads from the Examination of Microscopic Trace Evidence in Forensic Investigations

The Utilization of Microscopy in Developing Investigative Leads from the Examination of Microscopic Trace Evidence in Forensic Investigations

A New Method for the Removal and Analysis of Small Particles Adhering to Carpet Fiber Surfaces,,

Assessing three soil removal methods for environmental DNA analysis of mock forensic geology evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About