Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Evaluation of three methods for forensic diatom test].

Authors: Yuzhong, Wang; Jian, Zhao; Peng, Li; Sunlin, Hu; Huipin, Wang; Huijun, Wang; Chao, Liu;

[Evaluation of three methods for forensic diatom test].

Abstract

To compare the efficacy of three methods for forensic diatom test, namely strong acid digestion-centrifuge enrichment-light microscopy (SD-CE-LM), microwave digestion-membrane filtration-automated scanning electron microscopy (MD-ME-SEM), and microwave digestion-membrane filtration-light microscopy (MD-MF-LM).Sixty samples were randomly divided into 3 groups for diatom test using three methods, and the sample preparation time, degree of digestion and recovery rate of diatoms were compared.The sample preparation time was the shortest with MD-MF-LM and the longest with SD-CE-LM (P<0.05). MD-ME-SEM and MD-MF-LM allowed more thorough tissue digestion than SD-CE-LM. MD-ME-SEM resulted in the highest total recovery rate of diatom, followed by MD-MF-LM and then by SD-CE-LM (P<0.05); the recover rate of different diatom species was the highest with MD-ME-SEM, followed by MD-MF-LM and SD-CE-LM (P<0.05).SD-CE-LM has a low recovery rate of diatoms especially for those with lengths shorter than 40 µm or densities less than 1/5. With a high recovery rate and accuracy in diatom test, MD-ME-SEM is suitable for diagnosis of suspected drowning cases. MD-MF-LM is highly efficient, sensitive and convenient for forensic diatom test.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Diatoms, Microscopy, Drowning, Forensic Sciences, Microscopy, Electron, Scanning, Humans, Centrifugation, Microwaves, Specimen Handling

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!