Disaster victim identification operations with fragmented, burnt, or commingled remains: experience-based recommendations

References

• INTERPOL. Disaster victim identification guide. Lyon (France): INTERPOL; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Cordner S, Ellingham S. Two halves make a whole: both first responders and experts are needed for the management and identification of the dead in large disasters. Forensic Sci Int. 2017;279:60–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Boer HH, Maat GJ, Kadarmo DA, et al. DNA identification of human remains in Disaster Victim Identification (DVI): an efficient sampling method for muscle, bone, bone marrow and teeth. Forensic Sci Int. 2018;289:253–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mundorff AZ, Shaler R, Bieschke ET, et al. Chapter 12—Marrying anthropology and DNA: essential for solving complex commingling problems in cases of extreme fragmentation. In: Adams BJ, Byrd JE, editors. Commingled human remains. San Diego (CA): Academic Press; 2014. p. 257–273.
   Google Scholar
• National Transportation Safety Board. In-flight separation of vertical stabilizer, American Airlines Flight 587 Airbus Industrie A300-605R, N14053 Belle Harbor, New York November 12, 2001. Washington, DC: NTSB; 2014. (Aircraft Accident Report NTSB/AAR-04/04; no.PB2004-910404)
   Google Scholar
• Mundorff AZ. Anthropologist-directed triage: three distinct mass fatality events involving fragmentation of human remains. In: Adams BJ, Byrd JE, editors. Recovery, Analysis, and Identification of Commingled Human Remains. Oxford (UK): Elsevier Science; 2014. p. 363–386.
   Google Scholar
• Cordner SM, Woodford N, Bassed R. Forensic aspects of the 2009 Victorian bushfires disaster. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;205:2–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blau S, Briggs CA. The role of forensic anthropology in disaster victim identification (DVI). Forensic Sci Int. 2011;205:29–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dutch Safety Board. Crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. 2015. Available from: https://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/page/3546/crash-mh17-17-july-2014
   Google Scholar
• de Boer HH, Kloosterman AD, de Bruijn AG, et al. Identificatie van slachtoffers van een ramp. Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Geneeskunde. 2014;158:A8483. Dutch.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• de Boer HH, Maat GJ. The Dutch approach in disaster victim identification. Journal de Médecine Légale Droit Medical. 2016;59:85–91.
   Google Scholar
• Carli P, Pons F, Levraut J, et al. The French emergency medical services after the Paris and Nice terrorist attacks: what have we learnt? The Lancet. 2017;390:2735–2738.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludes B. Attentats du 13 novembre à Paris: premières considérations. La Revue de Médecine Légale. 2016;7:2–4. French.
   Google Scholar
• Delannoy Y, Delabarde T, Plu I, et al. Terrorist explosive belt attacks: specific patterns of bone traumas. Int J Legal Med. 2019;133:565–569.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leditschke J, Collett S, Ellen R. Mortuary operations in the aftermath of the 2009 Victorian bushfires. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;205:8–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leetaru K. How drones are changing humanitarian disaster response. 2015. Available from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2015/11/09/how-drones-are-changing-humanitarian-disaster-response/#6f967c79310c
   Google Scholar
• Tanzi TJ, Chandra M, Isnard J, et al. Towards “drone-borne” disaster management: future application scenarios. ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences; 2016 Jul 12–19; Prague (Czech Republic): XXIII ISPRS Congress. doi: 10.5194/isprs-annals-III-8-181-2016
   Google Scholar
• Shipman P, Foster G, Schoeninger M. Burnt bones and teeth: an experimental study of color, morphology, crystal structure and shrinkage. J Archaeolog Sci. 1984;11:307–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buikstra JE, Swegle M. Bone modification due to burning: experimental evidence. In: Bone modification. Orono (MN): University of Maine; 1989. p. 247–258.
   Google Scholar
• Symes SA, Rainwater CW, Chapman EN, et al. Patterned thermal destruction of human remains in a forensic setting. In: The analysis of burned human remains. Cambridge (MA): Elsevier; 2008. p. 15–54.
   Google Scholar
• Gonçalves D, Thompson TJ, Cunha E. Implications of heat-induced changes in bone on the interpretation of funerary behaviour and practice. J Archaeolog Sci. 2011;38:1308–1313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imaizumi K, Taniguchi K, Ogawa Y. DNA survival and physical and histological properties of heat-induced alterations in burnt bones. Int J Legal Med. 2014;128:439–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Boer HH, Blau S, Delabarde T, et al. The role of forensic anthropology in disaster victim identification (DVI): recent developments and future prospects. Forensic Sci Res. 2019;4:303–313.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Indriati E. Forensic anthropological roles in disaster victim identification of two Jakarta Hotels’s bomb blasts. Damianus J Med. 2014;13:148–157.
   Google Scholar
• Márquez-Grant N. The increasing role of the forensic anthropologist in the search for the missing. In: Multidisciplinary approaches to forensic archaeology. Cham (Switzerland): Springer; 2018. p. 77–91.
   Google Scholar
• Mundorff AZ. Integrating forensic anthropology into disaster victim identification. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2012;8:131–139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• INTERPOL. Annexure 17: roles and responsibilities of the forensic anthropologist. INTERPOL DVI guide. 2018. Available from: https://www.INTERPOL.int/How-we-work/Forensics/Disaster-Victim-Identification-DVI
   Google Scholar
• O’Donnell C, Iino M, Mansharan K, et al. Contribution of postmortem multidetector CT scanning to identification of the deceased in a mass disaster: experience gained from the 2009 Victorian bushfires. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;205:15–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iino M, Aoki Y. The use of radiology in the Japanese tsunami DVI process. J Forensic Radiol Imaging. 2016;4:20–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brough A, Morgan B, Rutty G. Postmortem computed tomography (PMCT) and disaster victim identification. Radiol Med. 2015;120:866–873.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson EK, James RA, Eitzen DA, et al. Role of orthopedic implants and bone morphology in the identification of human remains. J Forensic Sci. 2007;52:442–448.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith O, Pope EJ, Symes SA. Look until you see: identification of trauma in skeletal material. In: Hard evidence: case studies in forensic anthropology. Old Tappan (NJ): Pearson Education; 2003. p. 138–154.
   Google Scholar
• Nawrocki SP, Latham KE, Bartelink EJ. Human skeletal variation and forensic anthropology. In: New perspectives in forensic human skeletal identification. Cambridge (MA): Elsevier; 2018. p. 5–11.
   Google Scholar
• Antinick TC, Foran DR. Intra‐ and inter-element variability in mitochondrial and nuclear DNA from fresh and environmentally exposed skeletal remains. J Forensic Sci. 2019;64:88–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edson SM. Extraction of DNA from skeletonized postcranial remains: a discussion of protocols and testing modalities. J Forensic Sci. 2019;64:1312–1323.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins D, Austin JJ. Teeth as a source of DNA for forensic identification of human remains: a review. Sci Justice. 2013;53:433–441.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston E, Stephenson M. DNA profiling success rates from degraded skeletal remains in Guatemala. J Forensic Sci. 2016;61:898–902.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mundorff AZ, Davoren J, Weitz S. Developing an empirically based ranking order for bone sampling: examining the differential DNA yield rates between human skeletal elements over increasing post mortem intervals. Washington, DC: Department of Justice; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Startari L, Benoit J-N, Quatrehomme G, et al. Comparison of extractable DNA from bone following six-month exposure to outdoor conditions, garden loam, mold contamination or room storage. Med Sci Law. 2013;53:29–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prinz M, Carracedo A, Mayr W, et al. 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. 2007;1:3–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hines DZ, Vennemeyer M, Amory S, et al. Prioritized sampling of bone and teeth for DNA analysis in commingled cases. In: Commingled human remains. Cambridge (MA): Elsevier; 2014. p. 275–305.
   Google Scholar
• Mundorff A, Davoren JM. Examination of DNA yield rates for different skeletal elements at increasing post mortem intervals. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2014;8:55–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartman D, Drummer O, Eckhoff C, et al. The contribution of DNA to the disaster victim identification (DVI) effort. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;205:52–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blau S, Robertson S, Johnstone M. Disaster victim identification: new applications for postmortem computed tomography. J Forensic Sci. 2008;53:956–961.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aronson JD. Who owns the dead? Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Blau S, Phillips E, O’Donnell C, et al. Evaluating the impact of different formats in the presentation of trauma evidence in court: a pilot study. Aust J Forensic Sci. 2019;51:695–704.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Errickson D, Thompson TJ, Rankin BW. The application of 3D visualization of osteological trauma for the courtroom: a critical review. J Forensic Radiol Imaging. 2014;2:132–137.
   Google Scholar