Back to all available

Seasonality and abundance of dipteran species of potential forensic importance on pig carcasses in Saint Kitts

entomology
molecular-biology
zoology
legal-issues
science-and-medical-education

Abstract

This study aimed to identify insect species that visit and/or colonize pig carcasses during rainy and dry seasons in Saint Kitts, West Indies. Four pigs (2 pigs per season) were euthanized to mimic cases of homicide. Pig carcasses were caged and left to decompose naturally until the last stage of decomposition was achieved at day 60 post- euthanasia for each season. All five decomposition stages were observed (fresh, bloated, decay, advanced decay, and skeletonization) during the experimental period; however, the duration for each stage varied between the two seasons. Season of the year had a significant influence on the abundance of insect species, where the dry season attracted more insect numbers (n = 973) compared to the pig carcasses in the rainy season (n = 870) (p=0.015). The adult flies were morphologically identified and complemented by the use of universal COI primers to confirm identification to the species level. The collected flies during both the dry and rainy seasons were identified as Cochliomyia macellaria, Chrysomya megacephala, Ch. rufifacies, Musca domestica, and M. hydrotaea. Cochliomyia macellaria (n = 347) and M. domestica (n = 268) were the most abundant species during the rainy season compared to the dry season (n = 334) and (n = 174), respectively, indicating preference of the rainy season over the dry season. The fresh stage of pig carcasses was first colonized by C. macellaria in the rainy season, while, in the dry season, they were first colonized by Ch. megacephala, Ch. rufifacies, and C. macellaria. The observed succession pattern of these insects in a sequential manner confirms their forensic value in medico-legal investigations. This study presents the first report of insect species associated with seasonal pig carcass decomposition in Saint Kitts. Our preliminary results suggest the need for similar studies to be conducted in other Caribbean islands to provide more data, which can serve as a baseline for insect colonization and decomposition data for the region.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].