Dental and Medical Problems

Dent. Med. Probl.
Index Copernicus (ICV 2018) – 113.05
MNiSW – 20
Average rejection rate – 71.8%
Average waiting time at editors (to acceptance) – 18.38 days
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download PDF

Dental and Medical Problems

2015, vol. 52, nr 1, January-March, p. 86–92

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Open Access

The Effectiveness of 2D and 3D Methods in the Analysis of Experimental Bite Marks

Skuteczność metod 2D i 3D w analizie eksperymentalnych śladów ugryzień

Agnieszka Przystańska1,A,B,C,D,F, Agnieszka Przystańska2,A,B,C,D,F, Dorota Lorkiewicz-Muszyńska2,A,B,C,E,F, Michał Rychlik3,B,C,E,F, Mariusz Glapiński4,A,B,C,F, Marzena Łabędzka2,B,E,F, Paweł Świderski2,C,E,F, Czesław Żaba2,A,E,F

1 Department of Anatomy, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland

2 Department of Forensic Medicine, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland

3 Institute of Combustion Engines and Transport, Division of Virtual Engineering, Poznań University of Technology, Poznań, Poland

4 Oral Rehabilitation Clinic, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland

Abstract

Background. A bite mark left on different materials and surfaces such as food, chewing gum or the skin of dead or living persons and found at a crime scene can provide the crucial evidence required to secure a conviction in cases where neither fingerprints nor DNA are found. The most challenging factor in bite mark analysis is the interpretation of human bite marks left on the skin. This is due to both the specific character of skin – its elasticity and ability to distort – and the different shape and curvature of body parts and regions.
Objectives. To investigate the possibility of identifying a biter using 2D and 3D analysis of experimental bite marks and to check to what extent the characteristics of the material bitten influence the identification rate.
Material and Methods. The volunteers were asked to bite various materials of different structure and shape. The impressions of individuals’ dentition and wax bite registrators were taken in order to prepare dental casts. The samples of dental casts, corresponding bite registrators and bite marks from different materials were then scanned with 2D and 3D scanners, photographed, and finally examined and compared using computer methods.
Results. By comparing the characteristics of the teeth and experimental bite marks, it was possible to positively identify all individuals, but with different degrees of possibility. Negative results were obtained when comparing characteristics of teeth from one individual with the bite marks created by another individual who took part in the study.
Conclusion. When applied to experimental bite marks, both 2D and 3D methods proved effective in the positive identification of the biter.

Key words

forensic odontology, bite marks, identification

Słowa kluczowe

odontologia sądowa, ślady ugryzień, identyfikacja

References (21)

  1. Łabęcka M., Lorkiewicz-Muszyńska D., Przystańska A., Kondrusiewicz K.: Injuries due to human and animal aggression in humans. Ann. Agric Environ. Med. 2013, 20, 91–95.
  2. Bernitz H., Van Heerden W.F.P., Solheim T., Owen J.H.: A technique to capture, analyse, and quantify anterior teeth rotations for application in court cases involving tooth marks. J. Forensic Sci. 2006, 51, 624–629.
  3. Thali M.J., Braun M., Markwalder T.H., Brueschweiler W., Zollinger U., Malik N.J., Yen K., Dirnhofer R.: Bitemark documentation and analysis: 3D/CAD supported photogrammetry approach. Forensic Sci. Int. 2003, 135, 115–121.
  4. Żaba C., Lorkiewicz-Muszyńska L., Glapiński M., Smoluch K., Świderski P.: Identification of perpetrator based on bitemarks left on the victim’s body. Arch. Med. Sąd. Kryminol. 2010, 60, 22–26 [in Polish].
  5. Martin-de-las-Heras S., Tafura D.: Comparison of simulated human dermal bitemarks possessing three-dimensional attributes to suspected biters using a proprietary three-dimensional comparison. Forensic Sci. Int. 2009, 190, 33–37.
  6. Sheasby D.R., MacDonald D.G.: A forensic classification of distortion in human bitemarks. Forensic Sci. Int. 2001, 122, 75–78.
  7. Bernitz H., Piper S.E., Solheim T., Van Niekerk P.J., Swart T.J.P.: Comparison of bitemarks left in foodstuffs with models of the suspects dentitions as a means of identifying a perpetrator. J. Odontostomatol. 2000, 18, 27–31.
  8. Al-Talabani N., Al-Moussawy N.D., Baker F.A., Mohammed H.A.: Digital analysis of experimental human bitemarks: application of two new methods. J. Forensic Sci. 2006, 51, 1372–1375.
  9. Martin-de las Heras S., Valenzuela A., Ogayar C., Eng M., Valverde A.J., Torres J.C.: Computer-based production of comparison overlays from 3D-scanned dental casts for bitemark analysis. J. Forensic Sci. 2005, 50, 127–133.
  10. Bush M.A., Miller R.G., Bush P.J., Dorion R.B.J.: Biomechanical factors in human dermal bitemarks in a cadaver model. J. Forensic Sci. 2009, 54, 167–176.
  11. Keiser J.A., Bernal V., Wadell J.N., Raju S.: The uniqueness of the human anterior dentition: a geometric and morphometric analysis. J. Forensic Sci. 2007, 52, 671–677.
  12. Solheim T., Leidal T.I.: Scanning electron microscopy in the investigation of bitemarks in foodstuffs. J. Forensic Sci. 1975, 6, 205–215.
  13. Sweet D., Hildebrand D.: Saliva from cheese bite yields DNA profile of burglar: a case report. Int. J. Leg. Med. 1999, 112, 201–203.
  14. Hyzer W.G., Krauss T.C.: The bitemarks standard reference scale-ABFO No. 2. J. Forensic Sci. 1988, 33, 498-506.
  15. American Board of Forensic Odontology [Internet]. ABFO Diplomates Reference Manual p. 119 [cited 2013 Apr 5]. Available from: http://www.abfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/ABFO-Reference-Manual-1-22-2013-revision.pdf
  16. Pretty I.A., Sweet D.: The scientific basis for human bitemark analyses – a critical review. Sci. Justice 2001, 41, 85–92.
  17. Martin-de-las Heras S., Valenzuela A., Valverde A.J., Torres J.C., Luna-del-Castillo J.D.: Effectiveness of comparison overlays generated with DentalPrint© Software in bitemark analysis. J. Forensic Sci. 2007, 52, 151–156.
  18. Bernitz H., Owen J.H., Van Heerden W.F.P., Solheim T.: An integrated technique for the analysis of skin bitemarks. J. Forensic Sci. 2008, 53, 194–198.
  19. Blackwell S.A., Taylor R.V., Gordon I., Ogleby C.L., Tanijiri T., Yoshino M., Donald M.R., Clement J.G.: 3-D imaging and quantitive comparison of human dentitions and simulated bitemarks. Int. J. Leg. Med. 2007, 121, 9–17.
  20. Lorkiewicz-Muszyńska D., Glapiński M., Żaba C., Łabęcka M.: Comparative analysis of the bitemarks and teeth characteristics with use of 2D and 3D methods. Arch. Med. Sąd. Kryminol. 2011, 61, 107–114 [in Polish].
  21. Naether S., Buck U., Campana L., Breitbeck R., Thali M.: The examination and identification of bitemarks in foods using 3D scanning and 3D comparison methods. Int. J. Legal. Med. 2012, 26, 89–95.