Amaral and the dogs

[Carana]

I had that problem with some that I bookmarked some time ago ... I got into some by clicking on a link in the page not found notification.

I've read a lot about it as there are quite a few papers out there ... some of it way above my head.

The ones I have read about pig/chicken VOC seem to be concentrated more towards farming and the attendant pollution from the smells generated by the livestock.

What I am noticing is that those working in the field seem to still think pig scent and similarity of decomposition is the closest to human despite scientific studies saying there are more matching VOC in chickens.
I think these are the guys likely to know what they are talking about.


Mary Cabik seems to be an authority on the subject as she is quoted everywhere; the work is copyright protected, it seems that includes the abstract so I'm not sure if it will be allowed to stay on the forum for long.

Abstract:
Forensic Sci Int. 2012 Jul 10;220(1-3):118-25. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2012.02.007. Epub 2012 Mar 15.
Characterization of the volatile organic compounds present in the headspace of decomposing animal remains, and compared with human remains.
Cablk ME1, Szelagowski EE, Sagebiel JC.
Author information
1Desert Research Institute, 2215 Raggio Parkway, Reno, NV 89512, USA. mary.cablk@dri.edu
Abstract
Human Remains Detection (HRD) dogs can be a useful tool to locate buried human remains because they rely on olfactory rather than visual cues. Trained specifically to locate deceased humans, it is widely believed that HRD dogs can differentiate animal remains from human remains. This study analyzed the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) present in the headspace above partially decomposed animal tissue samples and directly compared them with results published from human tissues using established solid-phase microextraction (SPME) and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) methods. Volatile organic compounds present in the headspace of four different animal tissue samples (bone, muscle, fat and skin) from each of cow, pig and chicken were identified and compared to published results from human samples. Although there were compounds common to both animal and human remains, the VOC signatures of each of the animal remains differed from those of humans. Of particular interest was the difference between pigs and humans, because in some countries HRD dogs are trained on pig remains rather than human remains. Pig VOC signatures were not found to be a subset of human; in addition to sharing only seven of thirty human-specific compounds, an additional nine unique VOCs were recorded from pig samples which were not present in human samples. The VOC signatures from chicken and human samples were most similar sharing the most compounds of the animals studied. Identifying VOCs that are unique to humans may be useful to develop human-specific training aids for HRD canines, and may eventually lead to an instrument that can detect clandestine human burial sites.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22424672



Pig and human
https://ir.library.dc-uoit.ca/bitstream/10155/315/1/Stadler_Sonja.pdf

I'm wondering if the Cabik one is what I'd found. It had graphs with waves of various VOCs as they increased and decreased across the various phases. Possibly also according to what type of tissue, but I'm not sure about that now.

What I've noticed in many of these studies is how vague they are about how soon after death various VOCs can be detected. I've seen "soon after death", "in the fresh stage", and so on. I've also noticed that there are very few VOCs released / detectable in the "fresh" stage (generally 1-3 days). That raises the question of how many would have been present, which they would have been, and how long those initial compounds could remain detectable, particularly on non-porous surfaces if M had indeed died in that apartment.

[Brietta]

I'm wondering if the Cabik one is what I'd found. It had graphs with waves of various VOCs as they increased and decreased across the various phases. Possibly also according to what type of tissue, but I'm not sure about that now.

What I've noticed in many of these studies is how vague they are about how soon after death various VOCs can be detected. I've seen "soon after death", "in the fresh stage", and so on. I've also noticed that there are very few VOCs released / detectable in the "fresh" stage (generally 1-3 days). That raises the question of how many would have been present, which they would have been, and how long those initial compounds could remain detectable, particularly on non-porous surfaces if M had indeed died in that apartment.

There are various PMI studies being undertaken ... the following author gives access to the full text which I haven't read so no idea if it is relevant to the release of VOCs.

I have seen the paper, or a similar one, to which you refer so it does exist and I have read something by Cabik et al ... but I just can't find it now.



Estimation of postmortem interval from hypoxic inducible levels of vascular endothelial growth factor.

ABSTRACT Estimation of the postmortem interval (PMI) is one of the most important tasks in forensic medicine. Five autopsy organ tissues such as brain, lungs, heart, liver, and kidneys were taken at the time of forensic autopsy from 19 known PMI cases with a range of postmortem intervals ranging from 1 to 120 h (the mean was 25.81 h), and the time-course of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression was measured. The human hepatoma-derived Hep 3B cell line was used as a control. The levels of VEGF increased linearly with the PMI up to 20 h in lung (r = 0.95 and in kidney (r = 0.89), and up to 15 h PMI in liver (r = 0.88). The VEGF levels fell after 24 h PMI, and then remained stable. In brain, the levels of VEGF started to increase after 24 h PMI and increased linearly with PMI up to 40 h in brain (r = 0.94) and then begin to fall. In heart, there was no clear correlation between the PMI and VEGF level. Some variations occurred in selected cases, such as the infant and asphyxial deaths. In conclusion, measurement of hypoxia-inducible levels of VEGF in various body organs appears to be a useful method of estimating the PMI up to 24 h in forensic medicine and pathophysiology. This method is also probably applicable in ischaemia in clinical and basic medicine.

Estimation of postmortem interval from hypoxic inducible levels of vascular endothelial growth factor. (PDF Download Available). Available from: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/11309204_Estimation_of_postmortem_interval_from_hypoxic_inducible_levels_of_vascular_endothelial_growth_factor [accessed Aug 22, 2015].

[stephen25000]

Do do you even vaguely comprehend the information that you are cutting and pasting. ?

[stephen25000]

From the quarters of cyberspace you inhabit, probably none ....

Ah diddums.

[Carew]

So?  Your response to my last point was facetious was it not?  Or were you actually being sincere?  Ho ho.

I applied just a few of the many and varied examples of contaminants put forward as possibly alerted to by Eddie to your practical example "in the field," so to speak.

 I didn`t think them up, so it`s hardly my fault if all the "alert triggers," had they happened in practice, came across as facetious.

[Alfred R Jones]

I applied just a few of the many and varied examples of contaminants put forward as possibly alerted to by Eddie to your practical example "in the field," so to speak.

 I didn`t think them up, so it`s hardly my fault if all the "alert triggers," had they happened in practice, came across as facetious.

You have no contol over whether or not you come across as facetious?  I see...

[Carew]

You have no contol over whether or not you come across as facetious?  I see...

Slight comprehension malfunction, maybe ?

..........all the "alert triggers" , had they happened in practice came across as facetious......(as they obviously did to you.)

Many of them do to me , too although I think they are meant to be serious

[Alfred R Jones]

Slight comprehension malfunction, maybe ?

..........all the "alert triggers" , had they happened in practice came across as facetious......(as they obviously did to you.)

Many of them do to me , too although I think they are meant to be serious

Only human beings can be facetious, whatever triggers a dog to alert (and we know it can be many things) cannot be facetious, so I think perhaps the comprehension malfunction is yours.

[G-Unit]

Only human beings can be facetious, whatever triggers a dog to alert (and we know it can be many things) cannot be facetious, so I think perhaps the comprehension malfunction is yours.

It was human beings who suggested that dogs trained to find dead bodies will alert to coconuts, pig-based manure, kebabs, snot, and various other peculiar things. They were being serious (really?), but to Carew and others (including me) the suggestions appeared to be facetious (because they were absurd).

[Mr Gray]

The most important point...which the sceptics seem to want to avoid...is that the alerts have no evidential value and it doesn't take much thought to see why this is. Stephen insists that they are circumstantial evidence..which is wrong...circumstantial evidence is admissible in court.

[G-Unit]

The most important point...which the sceptics seem to want to avoid...is that the alerts have no evidential value and it doesn't take much thought to see why this is. Stephen insists that they are circumstantial evidence..which is wrong...circumstantial evidence is admissible in court.

I would refer to them as clues.

[Carew]

Only human beings can be facetious, whatever triggers a dog to alert (and we know it can be many things) cannot be facetious, so I think perhaps the comprehension malfunction is yours.

The nit-pickers` convention of one was still in session after I left then......

No comprehension issues this end.

 `Twas yourself did struggle and mither over it.

  I........(a human being.... Well spotted)....... did not think up the many and varied alert trigger contaminants. 

 Others ...... ( i.e. another set of human beings)........did so.... and they came across as facetious suggestions when applied in a practical context.

You`re on your own with it from now on.

[Mr Gray]

I would refer to them as clues.

I really think the alerts are totally bogus. I've supported Grime but now feel after seeing the report from the PJ re the searches that he has been evasive re the value of the alerts.
He was asked whether the alert to cuddlecat was a trick or a concrete alert to cadaver odour...he did not answer the question.....some have berated Kate for not answering questions...why should Grime fail to answer this one

[G-Unit]

I really think the alerts are totally bogus. I've supported Grime but now feel after seeing the report from the PJ re the searches that he has been evasive re the value of the alerts.
He was asked whether the alert to cuddlecat was a trick or a concrete alert to cadaver odour...he did not answer the question.....some have berated Kate for not answering questions...why should Grime fail to answer this one

As I see it he was brought in on the recommendation of Mark Harrison. He searched with his dogs where he was asked. His dogs alerted to various McCann related locations and objects. He says several times that the alerts must be confirmed by forensic findings. He also says several times that the dogs alert only to the scents they are trained to find.

With regard to cuddle cat, he is quite clear I think, considering he has already stated numerous times that the dogs only alert when they find the scent they are trained to find;

'Can you confirm if the signal given regarding the stuffed toy corresponds to a concrete alert of detection of a cadaver, or a mere trick played by the dog''
The dogs were not taught any 'tricks'. EVRD 'signalled' the toy, which at my request was retained by the Judicial Police for future forensic analysis. I have no knowledge of the results of any forensic analysis on the toy.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm

[Lace]

I've never taken the alerts seriously to be honest.

There was too much calling back where as in the other apartments Eddie just ran in and out more or less.

I think he alerted to blood behind the sofa but I don't believe it had anything to do with Madeleine,   let's be honest would there just be a speck of blood UNDER A TILE if that had anything to do with Madeleine falling banging her head and bleeding from the blow?

The other alerts Cuddle Cat Eddie played with it picking it up in his mouth,   the clothes again Eddie picked them up in his mouth,  he looked to be playing with them.

In the garden in my opinion it was probably the garden fertiliser.