Presentation Type
Poster Presentation
Abstract/Artist Statement
Purpose: Within biological, anatomical systems, bone is a connective tissue that acts as the main supporting internal structure of the body. It directly reflects the soft tissues (e.g. muscles) that surround it in what osteologists call “bone morphologies” and is the primary focus of studies in forensic anthropology and zooarchaeology. Within these disciplines, species identification is one of the first steps in the analysis of bone fragments in both forensic and archaeological contexts. This thesis project focuses on the identification of human vs. non-human bone using a novel, non-destructive histological method assuming a qualitative distinction can be found between species using a high-resolution camera microscope.
Methods: Using an AmScope camera microscope, this method is testing for a notable difference in human vs. cow vs. deer endosteal cortical bone without the use of destructive, histological cross-sections. All bones are already fractured, photographed under 100x resolution, and examined for orientation and pattern of vascularization, type of primary bone (e.g. lamellar vs. plexiform), morphological measures of the transition from cortical to cancellous bone, and robusticity of the cortical bone. The non-human species were chosen for their common appearance in potential forensic cases that have come through the University of Montana Forensic Anthropology Lab (UMFAL).
Originality: Current methods for human vs. non-human taxa identification include morphological, genetic, and histological analyses to determine forensic significance and assess what is present in an assemblage. These established techniques rely on the presence of mostly complete morphological features or destructive analyses to attempt to identify the species of origin and are impractical for use in most forensic and archaeological contexts where highly fragmented bones are the norm. This study attempts to develop a new methodology for use in contexts where these other methods are not possible or available.
Significance: The results of this study could provide an accessible, affordable, and fast identification method which, in turn, could save time and resources if non-human determinations are made early in a forensic investigation. By applying this at a crime lab, someone without extensive histological knowledge in osteology could look for quantitative and basic morphological features to establish forensic significance of remains. In an archaeological context, this method could be useful for similar cost, non-destructive, and efficiency reasons with the additional caveat that most faunal fragments found are regularly too small for taxonomic or element identification beyond possible long bone shaft fragments. This would additionally help give archaeologists and biological anthropologists a method for human vs. non-human taxonomic identification in known archaeological sites that is respectful to tribal beliefs on how to handle the deceased.
Mentor Name
Dr. Meradeth Snow
Human vs. Non-human bone: A non-destructive histological method
UC North Ballroom
Purpose: Within biological, anatomical systems, bone is a connective tissue that acts as the main supporting internal structure of the body. It directly reflects the soft tissues (e.g. muscles) that surround it in what osteologists call “bone morphologies” and is the primary focus of studies in forensic anthropology and zooarchaeology. Within these disciplines, species identification is one of the first steps in the analysis of bone fragments in both forensic and archaeological contexts. This thesis project focuses on the identification of human vs. non-human bone using a novel, non-destructive histological method assuming a qualitative distinction can be found between species using a high-resolution camera microscope.
Methods: Using an AmScope camera microscope, this method is testing for a notable difference in human vs. cow vs. deer endosteal cortical bone without the use of destructive, histological cross-sections. All bones are already fractured, photographed under 100x resolution, and examined for orientation and pattern of vascularization, type of primary bone (e.g. lamellar vs. plexiform), morphological measures of the transition from cortical to cancellous bone, and robusticity of the cortical bone. The non-human species were chosen for their common appearance in potential forensic cases that have come through the University of Montana Forensic Anthropology Lab (UMFAL).
Originality: Current methods for human vs. non-human taxa identification include morphological, genetic, and histological analyses to determine forensic significance and assess what is present in an assemblage. These established techniques rely on the presence of mostly complete morphological features or destructive analyses to attempt to identify the species of origin and are impractical for use in most forensic and archaeological contexts where highly fragmented bones are the norm. This study attempts to develop a new methodology for use in contexts where these other methods are not possible or available.
Significance: The results of this study could provide an accessible, affordable, and fast identification method which, in turn, could save time and resources if non-human determinations are made early in a forensic investigation. By applying this at a crime lab, someone without extensive histological knowledge in osteology could look for quantitative and basic morphological features to establish forensic significance of remains. In an archaeological context, this method could be useful for similar cost, non-destructive, and efficiency reasons with the additional caveat that most faunal fragments found are regularly too small for taxonomic or element identification beyond possible long bone shaft fragments. This would additionally help give archaeologists and biological anthropologists a method for human vs. non-human taxonomic identification in known archaeological sites that is respectful to tribal beliefs on how to handle the deceased.