Table Of Content

DETECTINGBURIEDREMAINSINFLORIDAUSING GROUND-PENETRATINGRADAR By JOHNJOSEPHSCHULTZ ADISSERTATIONPRESENTEDTOTHEGRADUATESCHOOL OFTHEUNIVERSITYOFFLORIDAINPARTIALFULFILLMENT OFTHEREQUIREMENTSFORTHEDEGREEOF DOCTOROFPHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITYOFFLORIDA 2003 Copyright2003 by JohnJosephSchultz Thisworkisdedicatedtomyparents,KennethandFrances,fortheirboundless supportandencouragement. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thisresearchcouldnothavebeencompletedwithoutcontinuedsupportfrom manyindividuals. Foremost,IamgratefulforalloftheinputandsupportIreceivedfrom mycommittee. Dr.AnthonyFalsetti,mychairman,providedvaluableguidanceand fundingthatallowedmetopursuethisresearchprojectandworkattheC.A.Pound HumanIdentificationLaboratory. Dr.MaryCollinsprovidedaccesstotheGPR, stimulatedmyinterestsinsoilscience,andwasaconstantsourceofguidanceformy research. Dr.MichaelWarrenprovidedvaluableguidanceformyresearchandtraining inforensicanthropology. Finally,Drs.StephenNawrockiandDavidDaeglingprovided valuablecommentswhilewritingthisdissertation. IwanttoexpressmyappreciationtoDrs.KathleenDeaganandKenneth SassamanforprovidingopportunitiestofurtherdevelopmyGPRskillsattheir archaeologicalsites. Thisworkcouldnothavebeencompletedwithoutthenumerous volunteerswhocontinuallyprovidedtheirassistanceinthefield. Althoughtherewere manymoreindividuals,Iwouldliketorecognizethoseundergraduateandgraduate studentswhoassistedmeonnumerousoccasions:NicolettePar,CarolPreyes,Dave Maltese,DavidHines,DoraMcDonald,MichaelTischler,ArdenMonroe,JosephHefner, andShannaWilliams. IwouldliketothankKeithHolleranandNatalieRodriguezatthe EnvironmentalPedologyandLandUseLaboratoryattheUniversityofFloridafor valuableassistancewithmysoilanalyses. AppreciationisduetoHeatherThewfor providingherprotocolforscoringdecompositionofburiedbodies. Inaddition,Michael iv Tischler,RexEllisandJosephHefnerprovidedassistancewithfigures;andTJDrew providedassistancewiththesoilanalyses. AppreciationisduetothestaffintheAnthropologyDepartmentforalloftheir assistancewhileIwasagraduatestudentattheUniversityofFlorida:Karen,Pat,and Salena. Iwouldalsoliketorecognizeanumberoffriendswhoprovidedsupport,either directlyorindirectly,tothisdissertation:BillLogallo,PeteSinelli,HeatherWalsh- Haney,ToshaDupras,JimBarham,andBethByron. Finally,Iwouldliketothankmy familyfortheircontinuedsupportandencouragementthroughoutgraduateschoolandthe dissertationprocess. IamthankfulforthecooperationoftheIFASAnimalScienceResearchand EducationCenterattheUniversityofFloridafortheuseofaresearchfieldsite. This studywasfundedthroughthegenerosityofnumeroussources:the1999Connective TissueResearchAward;a2000-2001ForensicSciencesLucasResearchGrant;a2002 WilliamR.MaplesMemorialScholarshipforGraduateResearchinForensic Anthropology,DepartmentofAnthropology,UniversityofFlorida;a2003JohnGoggin DissertationAward,DepartmentofAnthropology,UniversityofFlorida;anda2003 CollegeofLiberalArtsandSciences,ThreadgillDissertationFellowshipforthesummer term,UniversityofFlorida. Finally,IwouldalsoliketothankStevenKoppenjan,of BechtelNevada,SpecialTechnologiesLaboratory,forthesupportreceivedforanother GPRprojectusingtheGPR-X. v 1 TABLEOFCONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv ABSTRACT viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 ControlledForensicGPRResearch 2 DecompositionStudiesofBurials 6 ResearchObjectives 8 2 GEOPHYSICALMETHODS 9 Magnetics 1 Electromagnetics 13 Resistivity 14 ApplyingGPRtoGraveDetection 15 Ground-PenetratingRadar 21 3 HUAMANTAPHONOMY 33 TheDecompositionProcess 34 BoneDegradation 39 4 MATERIALSANDMETHODS 45 ResearchSite 45 PigCadavers 51 Ground-PenetratingRadarMethods 59 SoilAnalyses 64 AnalyzingDecomposition 66 Summary 71 5 DECOMPOSITONRESULTS 72 GrossDecompositionChanges 74 vi GeneralPatternsofDecomposition 83 IndependentVariables 86 Summary 95 6 SOILANALYSES 97 Florida'sSoils 97 GPREfficacyofFlorida'sSoilOrders 103 ClassificationofSoilsatResearchSite 105 SoilAnalysesofControlGraves 109 SoilChemistryChangesCausedbyDecomposition 116 Summary 123 7 GPRRESULTSFORLARGEPIGCADAVERS 124 The500-MHzAntenna 124 The900-MHzAntenna 141 Summary 156 8 GPRRESULTSFORSMALLPIGCADAVERS 158 The500-MHzAntenna 158 The900-MHzAntenna 177 Summary 191 9 DISCUSSION 193 Decomposition 194 Ground-PenetratingRadarComparisons 199 DetectingBuriedRemainsusingGPR 213 PerformingaForensicGPRSurvey 225 10 CONCLUSIONS 237 APPENDIX A SOILDESCRIPTIONS 243 B SOILANALYSES 248 LITERATURECITED 261 BIOGRAPHICALSKETCH 271 vii AbstractofDissertationPresentedtotheGraduateSchool oftheUniversityofFloridainPartialFulfillmentofthe RequirementsfortheDegreeofDoctorofPhilosophy DETECTINGBURIEDREMAINSINFLORIDAUSING GROUND-PENETRATINGRADAR By JohnJosephSchultz August2003 Chair:AnthonyB.Falsetti MajorDepartment:Anthropology Thisresearchtestedtheapplicabilityofusingground-penetratingradar(GPR)in Floridatodetectburiedbodies;andassessedtheeffectofbodysize,depth,antennatype, time,andsoiltypeongravedetection. Furthermore,becauseoftheemphasison decomposition,itwaspossibletoaddresstheroleofdepth,bodysize,time,andsoiltype ondecomposition. Thesitewaslocatedinanopenpasture,where20pig(Susscrofa) cadaversoftwoaverageweights(29.7and63.8kg)wereburiedattwodepths(50to60 or100to110cm). Thecadaversweremonitoredmonthlyfordurationsupto21months withGPRusing900-and500-MHzantennae. Twodifferentsoiltypeswereused:one composedsolelyofsandhorizonsandonecomposedofsandwithclayhorizonsat approximately1.00m. Thegraveswereexcavatedattheterminationofeachmonitoring periodtocollectsoilsamplesandscoredecomposition. Overall,depthwasthemostsignificantfactorcontrollingdecomposition, followedbytime. Bodysizeandsoiltypewerenotmajorfactors. Ground-penetrating viii radarcanbeaveryeffectivetoolforgravedetectioninFlorida. Salientanomalieswere producedforthedurationofthisstudyduetoastrongenoughcontrastbetweenthe skeleton,ordecomposingbody,andthesurroundingsoilwiththatoftheundisturbedsoil. Whilecadaversizeandtimewerenotmajorfactorsingravedetection,soiltypeand antennachoicewere. Althoughitwaspossibletodetectadecomposingbodyanda skeletoninbothshallowanddeepsandgraves,itwasdifficulttoimagelargepig cadaversretainingextensivesofttissueburiedinproximitytotheclayhorizoninaslittle assixmonths. Theclaymaskedthecontrastofthecadaversbyreducingtheirrelative dielectricpermittivity. Pigcadaversizewasnotamajorfactoringravedetection. Theimageryofthe500-MHzantennawaspreferredoverthehigherresolutionof the900-MHz,becausetheincreaseddetailmayresultindifficultydifferentiatingthe cadaveranomaliesfromgeneralbackgroundnoise. Postprocessingoftheprofilewasnot neededunlessexcessivehorizontalbandingwasnoted. ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Ground-penetratingradar(GPR)becameapopularandimportantremotesensing technologyinthemid-1980s. RecenttechnologicaladvancesinGPRhavemadeitmuch easiertoobtain,operate,andinterprettheresultsofthisequipment. Asaresult,GPRis nowroutinelyusedinnumerousdisciplinesforpracticalapplicationsandcontrolled research. Someofthemorecommondisciplinesincludearchaeology,forensics, engineering,environmentalscience,geology,militaryscience,mining,andsoilscience. GPRhasbecomeavaluablesearchtoolforgravesfromdifferenttimeperiodsand soiltypes. ThevalueofGPRingravedetectionwasfirstsuccessfullydemonstratedwith historicand/orcemeterygravesfromvariousregions(Bevan1991,Kingetal.1993, Vaughn1986). Furthermore,becauseofthesuccessoflocatinghistoricperiodgraves withGPR,therehasbeenincreasinginterestinthistechnologyforforensicapplications. ThenumberofreportedforensicburialsthathavebeensuccessfullylocatedwithGPR hasbeenincreasinginrecentyears(Calkinetal.1995,Davenport2001a,Nobes1999, Reynolds1997). ThesuccessofGPRinactualforensicsituationshasalsoledtonumerous controlledGPRstudies,simulatingaforensiccontext. OneaspectofGPRresearchthat isnowofprimeimportanceiscorrelatingstateofdecompositionofburiedbodiestoGPR imagerycharacteristics,inanattempttounderstandwhetherburiedbodiescanbe detectedinvariousstagesofdecompositionandskeletonization. Todothis,control 1