Cited by 0Forensic Entomology and Diptera StudiesForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisHistorical and Scientific Studies

Hydrogen cyanamide poisoning: multiple microscopic analyses evidence of forensic entomotoxicology succession on decomposing covered/uncovered rat carrions

Open access
Abd El-Aziz, Fatma El-Zahraa A., Abdel-Malek, Asmaa R., Mohammed, Marwa Kh., Eldeen, Muhammad Alaa, Ebrahem, Noha Esmael·2025·Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences

Abstract

Background: Forensic entomotoxicology is a crucial field that studies the effects of drugs and poisons on carrion-feeding insects, particularly in crime investigations. Hydrogen cyanamide, a plant growth regulator, is hazardous and used in agriculture but is limited in some countries due to its high cost and severe toxicity. The terrestrial isopod Porcellio laevis plays a vital role in soil ecosystems and biosystem management. Accordingly, authors aimed to examine the impact of hydrogen cyanamide toxicity on arthropods, specifically Porcellio laevis, Musca domestica (House flies), and Sarcophaga sp. (Flesh flies) visiting decomposing covered/uncovered rat carrions, which could be relevant in forensic investigations. A total of 20 rats were divided into two control (I and II, covered/uncovered) and two treated groups (III and IV, covered/uncovered, euthanized using hydrogen cyanamide). Arthropods were gathered bi-daily during the initial week and then once daily for a duration of 1 month and were assessed for growth rate. Morphological and histological alterations were analyzed using light and electron microscopes. Results: The results revealed that hydrogen cyanamide caused a delay in postmortem interval (PMI) by 22–33 h in certain insect species, particularly in uncovered carrion. Severe damage was observed in the carrions of Groups III and IV, specifically Porcellio laevis. Conclusion: A scanning electron microscope (SEM) would be beneficial for scrutinizing insects as postmortem toxicological specimens.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s41935-025-00439-z

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Abd El-Aziz, F. E.-Z. A., Abdel-Malek, A. R., Mohammed, M. K., Eldeen, M. A., & Ebrahem, N. E.
Affiliations
  • Assiut University (EG)
  • Zagazig University (EG)
Venue
Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences
Published
2025-04-04
Volume
15
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 2090-536X (ISSN-L)
  • 2090-5939
OpenAlex
W4409150238
Cited by
0
References
1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Forensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Historical and Scientific Studies
Keywords
carrion decomposition, Porcellio laevis, Musca domestica, Sarcophaga, insect growth rate, postmortem interval, insect morphology

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