The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Experimental Study of Vertebrate Scavenging Behavior in a Northwest European Woodland Context
Open accessAbstract
Vertebrate scavengers can modify surface deposited human remains which can hinder forensic investigations. The effects of such scavenging vary between species and regions. Published research into the effects of the scavenging of human remains is dominated by work from North America with few studies covering Northwestern Europe. Forensic scientists, investigators, and police search officers in Northwestern Europe are often left questioning on a basic level as to which scavengers are active and how they might affect human remains. This paper presents the results of a field study utilizing deer (Cervus nippon; Capreolus capreolus) as surface deposits observed by motion detection cameras in a British woodland. The most common avian and rodent scavenger species recorded included the buzzard (Buteo buteo), carrion crow (Corvus corone), wood mouse (Apodemus sylvaticus), and gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis). The scavenging behaviors observed were affected by seasonality, rates of decomposition, and insect activity. Scavenging by buzzards, unlike carrion crows, was most frequent during fall to winter and prior to insect activity. Overall, avian scavengers modified and scavenged soft tissue. Rodents scavenged both fresh and skeletonized remains with gray squirrels only scavenging skeletal remains. Wood mice were most active in winter and scavenged both soft tissue and bone.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Penetrating trauma influences vertebrate scavenger behaviour by luring them and by facilitating access to internal structures.
“Some pre vious studies state that penetrating trauma affects decomposition rate and/or pattern [152 -155], but also influences vertebrate scavenger behaviour by luring them and by facilitating access to internal structures [19,154].”
From Forensic experiments on animal scavenging: A systematic literature review on what we have and what we need (2023) · cites this paper as [19]
The Avian Scavenging section (page unavailable) says carrion crows initially scavenged sites of trauma, supporting the claim that trauma influenced where they fed. It does not establish that penetrating trauma lured vertebrate scavengers to carcasses. It says crows removed fur around wounds, thereby giving blowflies—not the vertebrate scavengers—easier access to internal cavities. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Ecology of Carnivore Social Behaviour
Macdonald, D. W. (1983) · Nature · doi:10.1038/301379a0 · Cited by 1,192
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 69
- 10.1097/00000433-200209000-00006 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0379-0738(97)00112-6 · DOI
- 10.1520/JFS13338J · DOI
- 10.1520/JFS12806J · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1520/JFS2003345 · DOI
- 10.1139/z04-022 · DOI
- 10.1007/s12024-007-0016-3 · DOI
- 10.1038/35036695 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF00296396 · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2004.2986 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.11.030 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.03.022 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01020.x · DOI
- 10.1080/00085030.2008.10757178 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.forsciint.2008.01.011 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00134.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1520/JFS16090J · DOI
- 10.1520/JFS2002078 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1520/JFS13224J · DOI
- Haglund W, 1997, Forensic taphonomy: the postmortem fate of human remains, 367
- 10.1520/JFS12521J · DOI
- 10.1520/JFS12679J · DOI
- 10.1520/JFS13337J · DOI
- 10.1520/JFS12718J · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jas.2006.12.006 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jflm.2010.04.008 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2011.03.004 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.07.023 · DOI
- 10.2307/5288 · DOI
- 10.1139/z00-173 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10164-004-0118-2 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2006.01199.x · DOI
- 10.1006/anbe.1999.1285 · DOI
- 10.1111/1556-4029.12554 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1520/JFS13311J · DOI
- 10.1520/JFS11524J · DOI
- Bass WM, 1997, Forensic taphonomy: the postmortem fate of human remains, 181
- 10.1080/19409041003653095 · DOI
- McHanwell S, 2008, The legal and ethical framework governing Body Donation in Europe: a review of current practice and recommendations for good practice, Eur J Anat, 12, 1
- 10.1016/S0140-6736(95)92166-4 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01277.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01206.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1520/JFS12680J · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2001.tb00199.x · DOI
- 10.1007/BF00317441 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1600-0587.1998.tb00552.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s00414-006-0086-x · DOI
- Micozzi M, 1991, Postmortem change in human and animal remains
- 10.1520/JFS2004017 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0379-0738(01)00411-X · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2006.0232 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00617.x · DOI
- 10.1007/s004140050212 · DOI
- 10.1520/JFS13594J · DOI
- 10.2307/2709 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2000.tb00773.x · DOI
- 10.1016/S0167-8809(99)00119-X · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2007.00467.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/ajpa.1330790105 · DOI
- 10.2981/09-037 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2006.00062.x · DOI
- 10.1139/z05-158 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/11956860.2003.11682778 · DOI
- Rodriguez WC, 1997, Forensic taphonomy: the post‐mortem fate of human remains, 459
- 10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.10.016 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jas.2011.06.020 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9781139878302 · DOI
- 10.1016/0305-4403(88)90081-7 · DOI · Paper page
- Yeshurun R, 2007, Differential fragmentation of different ungulate body‐size: a comparison of gazelle and fallow deer bone fragmentation in Levantine prehistoric assemblages, J Taph, 5, 137
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Indra, L., Lösch, S., Errickson, D., & Finaughty, D. (2023) · Forensic Science International · doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2023.111862 · Cited by 18
Metadata
- Authors
- Young, A., Stillman, R., Smith, M. J., & Korstjens, A. H.
- Affiliations
- Bournemouth University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Young, Alexandria
- Venue
- Journal of Forensic Sciences
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-03-10
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1333-1342
- ISSN
- 0022-1198 (ISSN-L)
- 1556-4029
- OpenAlex
- W2050027702
- Cited by
- 56
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3
- FWCI
- 3.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Journal of Forensic Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Bournemouth University Research Online (Bournemouth University) (acceptedVersion)
- Bournemouth University Research Online (Bournemouth University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Forensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Keywords
- human remains, forensic taphonomy, deer, sika deer, roe deer, buzzard, Buteo buteo, carrion crow, Corvus corax, Apodemus sylvaticus, Sciurus carolinensis, seasonal variation, decomposition, insect activity, woodland
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Behavior, Animal, Birds, Deer, Europe, Feeding Behavior, Postmortem Changes, Sciuridae, Seasons, Mice, Forests
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review