Internship Report

Internship in Anthropology: ANTH 4390

Hailey Duecker

December 2011

Being involved with something as profound as the Forensic Anthropology Center at Texas State

is a dream come true for me. I began volunteering at the Grady Early Forensic Anthropology Research

Laboratory in March of 2011, and after a few weeks of lab work I was able to help out with some of the

research being conducted at the Forensic Anthropology Research Facility out on the Freeman Ranch.

Since then I have been able to secure an Internship with the Lab Director Dr. Daniel Wescott, and the Lab

Coordinator Sophia Mavroudas. The three components, both labs and the facility, are the parts that make

up FACTS. The original first lab, the Grady Early Forensic Anthropology Laboratory opened in 2008

after much planning, and is located in the building where the Center for Archaeological Studies used to

be. The second lab, which opened in October of 2011, is the Osteological Research and Processing

Laboratory. It is located on the grounds of the Freeman Ranch off of Ranch Road 12, along with the

Forensic Anthropology Research Facility. Among the many daily activities conducted at both labs, I have

had the unique opportunity to participate in: processing of remains, labeling and curating of the donated

collection, casting of skeletal elements, pick-up and placement of donors, documentation of

decomposition and taphonomic changes, skeletal measurement and analysis, and field search and

recovery. While this internship required 10-15 hours per week, I routinely spent 15-20 hours helping at

FACTS, which allowed me to be involved with other opportunities being offered there, such as

Entomological presentations by visiting Professors from Texas A&M University, the two day Human

Remains Excavation course offered through Texas State University on the Freeman Ranch grounds, and

the Texas Association of Biological Anthropologists Conference held at Texas State

FACTS is a willed body donation program that focusses on two research aspects of Forensic

Anthropology, as well as functioning as a tool for law enforcement in the area to help identify unknown

skeletal remains. The first research aspect of FACTS is human decomposition research in determination

of the postmortem interval, which encompasses a very wide variety of research designs. The majority of

those individuals who willingly donate their body to the center are set out at the facility on the Freeman

Ranch and left to the elements to decompose under a metal cage, as to deter carnivore activity; in

particular vultures. There are those special few who are left uncaged to monitor vulture activity and later

to document the scatter of skeletal elements. There is also equipment available for aquatic

decomposition, and many donations are also buried for our research and for training purposes for law

enforcement. The second research aspect of the center is the development of a diverse osteological

collection. In order to accurately develop the biological profile from the skeletal remains of an unknown

individual, rigorous research must be conducted on individuals of know age, sex, stature and ancestry.

These four elements make up the biological profile necessary to identify unknown individuals.

In addition to these two research goals of the center, it also functions as an identification

laboratory for victims of homicide, or any unidentified human skeletal remains. Any time skeletal

remains have been found, regardless of the condition or manner of their discovery, a Forensic

Anthropologist must be consulted for their examination and consequent development of a biological

profile. This profile is a vital tool for law enforcement to narrow down any missing persons to be

compared with the remains found. The lab also has many tools available for the extraction of bone

samples to be sent to the University of North Texas’ human identification laboratory for the development

of a full DNA profile to definitively identify unknown remains. Forensic Anthropology can play a

dynamic role in the identification process, due to their unique skills in reading skeletal material and also

in their Archaeological training in excavation. Many times, FACTS is called and asked to direct either

the excavation of a possible burial site in a forensic case, or to direct a ground search for a missing

person.

PROCESSING

Although I am a mere undergraduate, I have had the opportunity to take part in many of the

different lab and facility procedures. The main duty of any undergraduate volunteer or intern is the

processing and skeletonization of human or animal remains for curation. This involves a process of hot

water submersion with the addition of detergents to loosen tissues and help clean the bone; this is also

known as hot water maceration. The skeletal elements are placed in different sized crock pots and

cooking vats, depending on the size of the individual being processed and the level of mummification.

Due to the severe heat and drought conditions of central Texas at present, many of the human remains we

place out at the facility and many of the animal remains brought in are incredibly dry and in differing

degrees of mummification. This makes for a much longer period of rehydration of the tissue so it can be

easily removed from the bone without damage to the bone. There were many times that, in the process of

trying to collapse a mummified animal into a biohazard bag for transport to the lab, the bones suffered a

‘torsion’ fracture and were broken quite easily. One of the positive features of mummified tissue is its

rubbery texture once rehydrated, which makes for an easier removal since it remains in one solid piece

even after a few days of submersion. There are many tools we have at the lab for tissue removal, such as

tweezers, hemostats, scissors, scrapers, scalpels and brushes. After each bone has been properly cleaned

and lightly brushed with a tooth brush, it is then set out to dry on butcher paper which could take a few

days. It is vital to let the bones dry completely before they are curated and labeled, as they tend to mold if

they are not completely dried. In addition to learning the intricacies of tissue removal of adult and

juvenile human remains, I have also learned the proper Personal Protective Equipment and procedures

that go along with working in a biohazardous lab. Before anyone can work at the lab, undergraduate,

graduate student or faculty, they must first take a blood borne pathogens class taught through the

University. Along with the other undergraduate volunteers, I have been thanked before by Forensic

Anthropology staff for being a willing participant in such morbid procedures. I feel incredibly grateful to

be handed this opportunity for experience in the field, and actually enjoy processing as it gives me the

chance to see human skeletal variation up close when I am defleshing remains and also the opportunity to

develop a comparative osteological knowledge of faunal remains to that of human remains.

LABELING AND CURATION

Once the bones are completely processed and dried, there is a standard operating procedure

(SOP) for their labeling and curation into the osteological collection. Every bone needs to be labeled in

order to distinguish that bone as belonging to its owner, and not confused with another individual at a

later date. Each bone has a specific place to be labeled, which can get incredibly tricky on the distal

phalanges (finger tips/toes) of the hands and feet. Labels are to be placed at a non articular surface (a

joint where two bones met during the life of the individual); usually the lateral side of the bone, to be

consistent; never in an area of specific interest, as in a fractured area, an area with pathology present or an

area which shows a specific representation of one of the elements of the biological profile. This last

stipulation of the SOP for labeling means that one should never place a label over:

• Age markers (not all)

o Pubic symphyseal face (Brooks et al. 1990)

o Auricular surface (Lovejoy et al. 1985)

o Suture lines of the skull

o Sternal rib ends

o Acetabulum (not a studied age marker,

but an articular surface that should not

be labeled)

Figure 1-Right inominate, anterior view (Sawchuck, 2003)

• Sex Markers (not all; these are the five areas of the

skull used for sex determination, outlined by Acsádi,

Nemeskéri 1970)

o Nuchal area

o Mastoid Process

o Supra-Orbital margin

o Supra-orbital ridge

o Mental eminence

These areas outlined above are only a few of such places that should never be written on when

labeling. It is also worth noting that the condition of the skeleton should be taken into account when

deciding where to label the element. Such areas that are particularly susceptible to degenerative changes

in old age should never be labeled if they are excessively porous or brittle; for example, the vertebral

column, sacrum, parts of the pelvis, and parts of the knee or hip joint. The equipment used in labeling

includes a fine tipped black pen and the clear B-72 liquid used to preserve the label. In the process of

labeling, you first read over the SOP for every single bone in order to decide where it should be properly

labeled. Once you have picked a place, you brush on a layer of B-72 and set it aside while you wait for it

to dry, which it does very fast. After you have applied a clear layer onto a few elements, you then write

the label with the fine tipped pen which would read D01-2012 (D is for donation, as opposed to an F for

forensic. The first number is the ordered number for that particular donation or forensic case, and the

second number is the year it came into our possession). After letting the penned label dry for a period of

Figure 2-Left lateral cranial view (Lynch, 2006)

around 10 minutes, a second layer of the clear B-72 is applied, to ensure that the label will not be wiped

or scraped off in future analysis. The completed label is left to dry for a few minutes and then

permanently curated at GEFARL.

MOLDING AND CASTING

One of the first projects I was asked to participate in during my internship was the casting of

certain skeletal age and sex markers of the donated collection. Among the many age and sex markers

there are, some of which were mentioned above, the ones of most importance to be casted are the pubic

symphisis, the sternal rib ends and sometimes the fusion of the medial clavicle. In theory, this task

seemed to be pretty straight forward and relatively easy; this is definitely not the case as I have found out.

There are many compounding factors which can make this process difficult, such as the porosity and

degeneration of the bone, how much material is used to make a mold of the bone, the size of the container

being used, the proper ratio of ingredients, the proper extraction of all air bubbles in the molding material

itself, the depth of the bone into the molding material, the stabilization of the bone while pouring the

mold…just to name a few.

First, to better familiarize the reader with the process of molding and casting, the steps need to be

described.

• Molding-creating a negative image of the bone surface

o Select bone to be molded and suspend into molding container using clay, Styrofoam,

rubber bands and popsicle sticks/tongue depressors

o Spray keyboard cleaner into container to remove all dust particles or bone dust

o Spray releasing agent into container

o Measure out part A and part B into equal parts and combine, stirring as you pour.

This mixture of molding agent A and B is known as Dragon Skin.

o Place mixed Dragon Skin into the vacuum air-extraction machine to remove all bubbles

present.

o After a sufficient amount of time has elapsed, in which all bubbles have risen to the

surface and then the mixture collapses in on itself, slowly release pressure in vacuum.

o Quickly pour mixture into the container, carefully monitoring its placement within the

container. Make sure all surfaces are covered sufficiently.

o Leave to dry 20-30 minutes, then carefully remove or cut bone from mold.

• Casting-creating the 3D copy image of the bone

o Remove all access Dragon Skin from the mold

o Pour water into mold to measure out how much casting material will be needed to fill the

negative image

o Spray keyboard cleaner and releasing agent into mold

o Measure out equal parts of casting material A and B, making sure to keep the two

ingredients separate until the cast is ready to be poured.

o Mix ingredient B into A as you stir

o Once the mixture begins to get warmer or foam collects on the surface, carefully pour it

into the mold. These ingredients react very rapidly.

o Leave to dry ~10 minutes, then carefully pull away Dragon Skin from hardened cast and

remove the 3D copied image

o Compare cast to original bone. It should be an exact copy of the bone; this may cause a

very gratifying feeling to wash over you.

There are many instances where this process can be disrupted or complicated. The first few casts

I finished making were under the complete supervision of the FACTS coordinator, Sophia. Needless to

say, these casts came out perfectly. Then I learned a few lessons on my own. The amount of preparation

you make in suspending the bone into the container is directly correlated with how well the cast turns out.

If you do not keep the bone stable in the container, the Dragon Skin can move the bone to the side of the

container, which could potentially create a hole in the mold. This may not be too detrimental to the end

result, as you could paint over another layer of Dragon Skin onto the outside of the mold. Dragon Skin

has the amazing property of only adhering to itself and never the container, the bone or human skin, so

you could actually keep applying layer over layer of Dragon Skin to itself in order to build a larger mold,

or a two part mold (this is a much more complicated and different process of molding). Another lesson I

have learned is that in cautiously trying not to waste any Dragon Skin, as it is very expensive, I have

many times not prepared enough to completely fill the mold. This is not actually even a problem, because

you can always make more but you can never put the materials back if you have made too much. On the

other hand, mixing too much of the Dragon Skin is not a problem as long as you have another mold that

may needs a second layer, but pouring too much Dragon Skin into the molding container can be. If you

have encased too much of the bone in the mold, removing it from the mold can take a while especially if

you cannot see the condition of the bone inside the mold. I specifically had a problem with this when I

attempted to cast a very fragile and porous rib end. While it ended in a mold that had to be cut into

multiple pieces and a bone that was in less than perfect condition, the actual casts made from the mold

turned out perfect. I have learned so much throughout this trial and error process, and appreciate every

success as well as every temporary failure that came along with those successes.

SKELETAL ANALYSIS AND MEASUREMENT

Much of what the undergraduate students do in the lab when there aren’t any other pressing duties

is practicing the measurement, analysis and laying out of skeletal remains. Anything we record while

under the supervision of Sophia and Dr. Wescott is not in the permanent file of the individual, but an

opportunity for us to develop our skill as amateur Forensic Anthropologists. We are given the proper

forms used at the lab for measurement recording, the SOP book to make sure we fully understand what

we are looking at, and the proper reference materials. Reference materials include text books, journal

articles and diagrams or figures that might be needed. Also available at the lab are the expertise of Dr.

Wescott, Dr. Hamilton, Dr. Spradley, Sophia, and all of the graduate students, who are more than happy

to answer any questions I have had in the past when I was not sure about something. Dr. Wescott

especially has been readily available to offer any help I have needed.

A full body photo of each individual

kept in the osteological collection at FACTS is

needed before any analysis can be conducted, to

ensure that all elements are present and

accounted for at all times and to ensure their

proper handling while curated at the facility.

This is easier said than done; it takes an

incredible amount of time and training to be able

to lay a full skeleton out in anatomical position.

A relative representation of how we lay

skeletons out in anatomical position can be seen

in Figure 3 to the right, although there are a few

things we do differently at the lab. In order to

correctly lay out an individual for a photo,

careful consideration needs to be taken as to the

correct siding of each of the paired bones, i.e.

the long bones and hands and feet, and the

correct order of sequential bones, i.e. the

vertebrae, ribs and phalanges. In placement of

each bone, one has to distinguish not only what

bone goes where, what side it belongs on, but

distal versus proximal end; the age of the

individual can make this tougher.

Figure 3-Full body photo (Smithsonian Institute, 2009)

With younger individuals whose epiphyses (ends of long bones) aren’t yet fused, it can be hard to

distinguish the side and placement.

DONATION PICK-UP AND PLACEMENT

The rare privilege of being able to help with the pick-up and placement of donated individuals is

one I did not get until I had been at the lab for about 7 months. Even now, it does not happen very often

since it can be a very time consuming task and one usually reserved for the graduate students, since they

have more experience in the procedures involved. When a body is willingly donated to the lab, it is either

delivered to the lab or FACTS will pick it up if it is within a 200 mile radius from the lab. This process

involves a lot of driving and paper work, among other things. One of the major stipulations for donations

is that they have no communicable diseases, such as hepatitis or AIDS. Once the person is at the ORPL

on the FARF grounds, he/she can be processed for intake; measurements, photos, and radiographs are

taken, along with extensive documentation as to the state of the remains, any tattoos present, any trauma

present and anything else that may affect the decomposition process. Samples are also taken of the nails,

hair and blood if available. These samples are for future research on stable isotope analysis at FACTS,

and some are also sent to researchers at Mc Master University in Canada and Mississippi State

University. Each donation accepted at FACTS receives the same documentation of decompositional

stages, unless they are being used for a specific research project. The individual is laid out on the facility

grounds, face up under a large cage and then multiple photos are taken as to again document the state of

the remains and their location. After being laid out, a photo is taken every day for two weeks, every other

day for two weeks and then once a week for two months. This proper documentation of the stages of

decomposition specific to Central Texas is vital to our understanding of these processes. While there may

be many facilities like FACTS, the one in Tennessee being the most well known, there needs to be proper

study of the decomposition process specific to each geographical environment; the data compiled from

such studies in Tennessee cannot be applied to every environment, which is why the facility at Texas

State is so valuable. Among the different ways I have been involved in the documentation of many of the

donations to the facility, two in particular stand out. Dr. Jarvis Hayman, a visiting professor from The

Australian National University in the graduate department of Archaeology and Anthropology, was

conducting research at FACTS to more accurately determine the time since death of individuals found

decomposing in an indoor environment. Dr. Hayman was interested in performing postmortem autopsies

on individuals during the early putrefaction stages, and more specifically the state of decomposition of the

brain, liver, heart and spleen. I was present for both of his autopsies, which were performed at two weeks

postmortem on the first individual and at one week postmortem on the second individual. These were the

first, and so far only, autopsies I have been present for. Without a doubt, these experiences were the most

interesting and fascinating scientific opportunities I have ever had, although I am just starting out in the

field. They were also, while leaving out a few gross details, the most intensely horrific experiences I have

ever had and am forever grateful to the FACTS staff, to Dr. Hayman and to the individuals who donated

their bodies for letting me help and experience something so vital to my future in Forensic Anthropology.

FIELD SEARCH AND RECOVERY

While interning at the lab, FACTS was called to help in the search and recovery of a girl who

went missing in November of 2004 during a flood. Along with her car, this young woman was swept

away by the rising waters at a low water crossing in San Marcos. In May of 2011, a partial skull was

recovered and sent to The University of North Texas for DNA analysis, but came back as inconclusive.

In an attempt to find other skeletal elements, students and faculty at FACTS combined with the Hays

County Sheriff’s office set out on September 9, 2011 to search for the young woman’s remains. We were

actively searching for about seven hours, and although we did not recover any human remains, we did

recover some clothing that matched the descriptions of what she had been wearing at the time of her

disappearance. With being able to help in this search and recovery, I learned a few tools to add to my list.

I learned how to conduct a line search, how to distinguish animal remains from human while in the field

(we found quite a few sets of faunal remains), what to wear to a search and recovery, what to expect when

dealing with law enforcement under such conditions, and how to collaborate with a large group

functioning for the greater good of helping a family get closure for the disappearance of their daughter. It

is easy while in the shelter of the lab to forget about the emotion that goes along with forensic case work.

This experience was really touching in that we were able to help a family in their search for their

daughter. Although we did not find any of her remains, her family was very grateful that so many people

were willing to donate their time and energy to search for her.

CONFERENCES AND WORKSHOPS

In addition to interning at the lab, I have been able to participate in three special opportunities;

two of which were offered through the lab, and the last was a conference being held at Texas State.

On Sunday November sixth, 2011, Drs. Jeff Tomberlin and Eric Benbow along with four other

graduate and doctoral students held a day-long Forensic Entomology workshop. Of the many topics

discussed were Forensic Entomology’s importance in a medicolegal context, entomological evidence

collection, preservation and shipment, indoor versus outdoor insect activity, taxonomy and the most

common species in the Central Texas area, acarological evidence (mite and tic activity in a forensic

setting), DNA testing on entomological evidence in relation to human decomposition, and the most

exciting presentation of the day: aquatic decomposition and the variables affecting certain insect species

in Texas. This workshop was a fascinating learning experience, and I will be applying the knowledge I

gained there for years to come.

The Human Remains Field Recovery course was held on the FARF/ORPL facility grounds, and

spanned for the two days of December third and fourth, 2011. Half of the first day consisted of classroom

presentations given by Dr. Wescott, Sophia Mavroudas and Caryn Tegtmeyer, one of the graduate

students in the Forensic Anthropology program. Here we learned proper Bioarchaeological excavation

techniques, such as: location of a site or crime scene, mapping and gridding procedures, photography,

tools used and how to use them, proper documentation of each step of the process and lab analysis. While

in the field, we learned how to apply all of the techniques previously mentioned. The excavation had a

rocky start to say the least, quite literally and metaphorically. Our grave was covered in around 15 large

rocks and hundreds of small ones, some of which we had to individually document and some of which we

ended up just throwing aside; this process of picking and choosing which rocks could potentially be A,

part of our crime scene, or B, affecting our burial, was a long and tedious one. Apart from the ongoing

rock situation, our first major obstacle to overcome was conflicting opinions as to how we should even

start the mapping and gridding system. There were differing levels of expertise and experience among

those in attendance for the course, and the reigns were given to the students as to how to excavate the

entire burial. After personalities were eventually set aside and/or dealt with, everything went

miraculously smoothly. We selected a permanent datum point to base all subsequent measurements upon,

set up a grid system based in inches instead of centimeters, staked all four corners of the burial, outlined

the burial itself based on soil differences and began to actually dig (something all of us were surprisingly

reluctant to do; for me it was from a fear of disturbing any context). Once we had ‘struck bone’, we

began intricately mapping and drawing the lay-out of the burial, right down to the adipose (greasy

substance left over when the fat in a body decomposes) layer below the body, all the while taking

measurements of the location and position of each bone, the depth of each bone and a photograph as well.

We ended up with a properly documented and excavated human burial. Another complicating factor in

our excavation was the weather; I cannot express how cold, wet and muddy this weekend was but

experiencing some of the worst conditions in an excavation just made my experience that much more

memorable and preparatory for future excavations. I enjoyed absolutely every minute of this amazing

opportunity.

.

The last function I have had the privilege to attend was the Texas Association of Biological

Anthropologists annual meeting, which was held at Texas State in Flowers hall on the weekend of the

fourth and fifth of November, 2011. Although I was only able to attend one day of presentations, I was

able to hear a few research presentations on Primatology studies, some of which were on certain Sifaka,

species in Madagascar, Howler monkeys, Long-tailed macaques and spider monkeys. I was able to stay

Left: Picture taken during the Human Remains Excavation course. I am shown (in pink) screening for bone fragments, along with Davette Gaddison and Sara Long.

for only a few of the research presentations from Texas State students, Thomas Scott and Meredith Tise,

and Caryn Tegtmeyer, but I was present for Dr. Michelle Hamilton’s presentation on the FACTS. It is

always a privilege to hear and understand the current theories and research being conducted in all

Anthropological areas, especially the research ideas coming from fellow Texans.

CONCLUSIONS

Trying to encompass what I have experienced as an intern for FACTS this semester seems like an

unfair task since it would in no way do justice to the mountain of career knowledge I have gained. I have

learned what it is like to work in a lab, and all of the SOPs that come along with this job. I have

witnessed, from the bottom up, the tasks involved in running a lab and the stress that goes along with it. I

have also gained a little ethnographic insight into the cultural world of academic Anthropology, and how

to be a functioning member of academia. I have learned proper technique in so many different aspects of

Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology, mainly through trial and error. If it weren’t for the constant

guidance and encouragement I have gotten from Sophia Mavroudas, Drs. Daniel Wescott, Katherine

Spradley, and Michelle Hamilton, I would be lost as they have helped me build a career that will

hopefully span the rest of my life. As for my next steps towards a career in Anthropology, I am in the

application process for a Field School in Mortuary Archaeology in Drawsko Poland, and for Graduate

programs as well. I hope to start a Graduate program in Forensic Anthropology in the fall of 2012.

REFERENCES

(1) Sawchuck. (Photographer). (2003). Anthropology, University of Toronto at Scarborough.

Retrieved from http://reel.utsc.utoronto.ca/mboyer/Sawchuk/bones_thumbnail_2.ht

(2) Brooks, S. T. and J. M. Suchey. 1990. Skeletal age determination based on the Os Pubis: A

comparison of the Acsádi-Nemeskéri and Suchey-Brooks methods. Human Evolution

5:227-238.

(3) Lovejoy, C. O., R. S. Meindl, T. R. Pryzbeck, and R. P. Mensforth. 1985. Chronological

metamorphosis of the auricular surface of the ilium: A new method for the determination

of age at death. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68:15-28.

(4) Acsádi, G. and J. Nemeskéri. 1970. History of the human life span and mortality. Akademiai

Kiado, Budapest.

(5) Lynch, P. J. (Artist). (2006). Wikimedia commons. Retrieved from

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Human_skull_lateral_view.jpg

(6) Smithsonian Institute. (Photographer). (2009). Behind the scenes. Retrieved from

http://anthropology.si.edu/writteninbone/comic/activity/behind_the_scenes.htm