Identification of historical human skeletal remains: a case study using skeletal and dental age, history and DNA

Abstract

Excavation of an early historical (circa 1900) church cemetery in Cochrane, Alberta, Canada, revealed the graves of six individuals. All but one had been previously excavated and the individuals were re-interred elsewhere. The remaining grave contained a coffin burial of an infant including most of the skeleton, crowns of forming deciduous teeth, scalp and hair. The remains were excavated and historical research was carried out to determine possible families who had used the cemetery. Skeletal and dental age estimates pointed to a particular individual described in historical records. This identification was confirmed through more precise ageing by dental microstructure, sex determination using DNA, and finally, maternal relatedness by comparison of mtDNA with a living female relative. In addition to describing the analytical methods used, this paper demonstrates the importance of accurately identifying historical burials, particularly when living relatives remain in the community.

Incremental enamel development in modern human deciduous anterior teeth

“…Shellis (1984) calculated CFTs for deciduous maxillary and mandibular lateral incisors (n 5 2) and canines (n 5 4) combined using a formula that quantified extension rates along the EDJ (though, see Discussion in Smith et al, 2006). Katzenberg et al (2005) reported formation time for di 2 and dc 1 , but as they noted, the enamel was damaged so it was difficult to provide an accurate CFT. FitzGerald et al (1999FitzGerald et al ( , 2006) calculated a CFT of twelve months for six canines (mandibular and maxillary combined), 6 months for one lateral incisor, and 5 months for one central incisor.…”

A Fisk patent metallic burial case from Western Missouri: an interdisciplinary and comprehensive effort to reconstruct the history of an early settler of Lexington, Missouri

“…Ideally the genetic assets or DNA of the unknown individual can be compared with those of a presumed relative to make a personal identification. When DNA comparisons are not possible, anthropological methods that examine unique features of the bone and teeth, especially when combined with circumstantial evidence, are a valid alternative (Katzenberg et al 2005). To provide personal identification in historical archaeology cases it is necessary for the biological, genealogical, and artifactual data to concur (Owsley et al 2006).…”

“…Accidental discovery of historical cemeteries and graves are not uncommon in modern urban areas, and the information gleaned by studying the human remains and artifacts can offer significant insights into the health, lifestyles, and mortuary practices of the people of the times (Lee and Magilton 1989;Jamieson 1995;Allen IV 2002;Katzenberg et al 2005;Kjellström 2005;Owsley et al 2006). The study of cemeteries and burials also appeal to the public and allow anthropologists to showcase the kinds of information that can be attained from such studies (Mytum 2007).…”

Personal Identification of Cold Case Remains Through Combined Contribution from Anthropological, mtDNA, and Bomb‐Pulse Dating Analyses

“…The FTA card was extracted using the Qiagen QIAamp DNA Investigator Kit following the manufacturer's instructions. The HVI and HVII regions of the mtDNA control region were targeted using two primer sets (Integrated DNA Technologies, Coralville, IA) (mt1-1 5′-TAACTCCACCA-TTAGCACCC-3′, mt2-2 5′-TGATTTGAGGGAGGATGGTG-3′ and mt3-1 5′-CACCCTATTAACCACTCACG-3′, mt4-2 5′-GCT GGTGTTAGGGTTCTTTG-3′) as described in the study by Katzenberg et al (20). PCR was run for 40 cycles at 94°C for 1 min, 52°C for 1 min, and 72°C extension for 1 min, with an initial 12-min denaturing period at 95°C.…”