SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Adli Tıp Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 28 Sayı: 2

MORPHOLOGICAL COMPARISON OF HAIR

KILIN MORFOLOJİK KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Mehmet Cavlak(Adalet Bakanlığı, Adli Tıp Kurumu, Ankara Grup Başkanlığı, Ankara, Türkiye)
Faruk Aşıcıoğlu(Adalet Bakanlığı, Adli Tıp Kurumu, İstanbul, Türkiye)
Pages
121–131
Publication Date
2014-08-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Forensic hair morphological analysis and comparison is a method that should not be ignored.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The importance and validity of microscopically hair investigation has been proved with numerous international publications and books published.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For such purpose, 10 questioned hair samples from 10 known individuals are intended to be identified by most common techniques currently used for this field.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Forensic hair morphological analysis and comparison is a method that should not be ignored.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:kıl morfolojisi · adli kıl incelemesi · kimliklendirme

Abstract

Objective: The importance and validity of microscopically hair investigation has been proved with numerous international publications and books published. Although hair investigation has been done worldwide for a long time so far, it has not been used in Turkey except for special cases and the scientific publications about the subject are very few in number. Methods: This study is performed by an inexperienced investigator who has taken basic training, aiming to determine the potential of accuracy in comparing hair samples and identification. For such purpose, 10 questioned hair samples from 10 known individuals are intended to be identified by most common techniques currently used for this field. Results: As a result, 6 questioned hairs out of 10 have been identified correctly, while 2 identifications were incorrect and 2 couldn’t be associated. Conclusion: The investigator’s lack of experience and training is thought to be the reason for mismatched and unidentified results. Unlike DNA analysis hair comparison is not a method to provide positive identification. However it is applicable in case of DNA is not available from a questioned hair root. When a conclusion is reached by using mitochondrial DNA analysis with hair comparison for the selected cases and also a second investigator performs the analysis using the same method, the accuracy of final decision should increase. When a hair is accepted to a forensic biology laboratory the first step should always be microscopic investigation to evaluate the compatibility of a hair sample for DNA analysis and to investigate the sample for possible surface evidences. This study revealed the importance of training and experience in forensic hair comparison. Forensic hair morphological analysis and comparison is a method that should not be ignored.

Özet

Amaç: Kılın mikroskopik incelenmesi ve karşılaştırılmasının önemi ve geçerliliği, uluslararası alanda yapılan çok sayıda bilimsel yayın ve kaynak kitaplarda ortaya konulmuştur. Pratikte de uzun zamandan beri uygulanıyor olmasına rağmen, ülkemizde özel vakalar dışında uygulanmamıştır ve bu konudaki bilimsel çalışma sayısı azdır. Yöntemler: Bu çalışmada, kıl karşılaştırması konusunda temel düzeyde eğitim almış bir incelemecinin morfolojik karşılaştırma ile kılları ayırt etme ve muhtemel aidiyetini belirleme potansiyeli araştırılmıştır. İncelemeciden, konu ile ilgili dünyada genel kabul gören yöntemleri kullanarak, 10 tane bilinmeyen kılın, aidiyeti bilinen 10 kişiden hangisine ait olduğunu tespit etmesi istenilmiştir. Bulgular: Sonuç olarak 6 kılın aidiyeti doğru tespit edilmiş, 2 kıl yanlış eşleştirilmiş ve 2 adet kılın da aidiyeti tespit edilememiştir. Sonuç: Yanlış eşleştirme yapılan ve aidiyeti tespit edilemeyen kıllarda, incelemecinin ileri düzey eğitimleri almamış olması ve yeterli deneyime sahip olmamasının önemli rol oynadığı düşünülmüştür. Kıl karşılaştırması, DNA analizi gibi pozitif kimliklendirme sağlayabilen bir yöntem değildir. Bununla birlikte kıl kökünden DNA elde edilemeyen durumlarda başvurulabilecek bir uygulamadır. Bu uygulamanın mitokondriyal DNA analizi ile birlikte değerlendirilmesi ve ikinci bir incelemeci tarafından da aynı yöntemin uygulanması ile karara varılması, varılan kararın değerini ve geçerliliğini arttıracaktır. Adli biyoloji laboratuvarlarında hem DNA analizi uygunluğu hem de kılın üzerinde olabilecek yüzey delillerinin tespiti açısından, ilk basamak her zaman mikroskopik inceleme olmalıdır. Bu çalışmanın sonucunda kıl karşılaştırmasında deneyim ve eğitimin gerekliliği ve önemi ortaya çıkmıştır. Kılın adli morfolojik incelemesi ve karşılaştırılması, ihmal edilmemesi gereken bir yöntemdir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Cavlak, M., Aşıcıoğlu, F. (2014). MORPHOLOGICAL COMPARISON OF HAIR. Adli Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 28 Sayı: 2, 121–131. https://ajindex.com/articles/1352657

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (32)

  1. Lee HC, Harris HA. Physical Evidence in Forensic Science: Hair. Arizona: Lawyers & Judges Publishing Co. Inc., 2000:173-9.
  2. Robertson J. Forensic Examination of Hair. London: CRC Press, 1999.
  3. Gaudete BD, Bisbing RE, Yoshino M, Sato H. Hair. In: Siegel J, Knupfer G, Saukko P eds. Encyclopedia of Forensic Sciences. 1st ed., Volume 3, Somerset: Academic Press, 2000:999-1041.
  4. Bisbing RE. The Forensic Identification and Association of Human Hair. In: Safer- stein R. ed. Forensic Science Handbook. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1982:185-212.
  5. Deedrick DW, Koch SL. Microscopy of Hair Part I: A practical guide and manual of human hairs. Forensic Science Communications, 2004;6 1.
  6. Deedrick DW, Koch SL. Microscopy of Hair Part II: A practical guide and manual for animal hairs. Forensic Science Com- munications, 2004;6 3.
  7. Houck MM, Bisbing RE, Tani G. Watkins TG, Harmon RP. Locard exchange: The science of forensic hair comparisons and the admissibility of hair comparison evidence: Frye and Daubert considered. Modern Microscopy Journal Online, 2004. Available at: http://www.modernmicroscopy.com/ main.asp?article=36&print=true&pix =true Cited: September 17, 2013.
  8. Bisbing RE. Forensic Hair Comparisons: Guidelines, standards, protocols, quality assurance and enforcement. Presentation to The National Academies US Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Sciences Community. Westmont, 2007.
  9. Deedrick DW. Hairs, fibers, crime and evidence. Forensic Science Communications, 2000;3 2.
  10. Kubik TA, Nicholas P. Microanalysis and examination of trace evidence. In: James SH, Nordby JJ. eds. Forensic Science: An Introduction to Scientific and Investigative Techniques. Florida: CRC Press, 2003:264-6.
  11. Houck MM, Budowle B. Correlation of microscopic and mitochondrial DNA hair comparisons. J Forensic Sci 2002;47 5:1- 4.
  12. Gaudette BD, Keeping ES. An attempt at determining probabilities in human scalp hair comparison. J Forensic Sci 1974;19 3:599-606. 13. Strauss M. Forensic characterization of human hair I. The Microscope 1983;31:15-29.
  13. Scientific Working Group on Materials Analysis. Forensic Human Hair Examination Guidelines. Forensic Science Communications, 2005;7 2.
  14. Gaudette BD. Some further thoughts on probabilities and human hair comparisons. J Forensic Sci 1978;23 4:758- 63.
  15. Kirk PL. Human hair studies. I. General Considerations of hair individualization and it’s forensic importance. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 1940;31 4:486-96.
  16. Atasoy C. Kılın Adli Tıptaki Önemi. Uzmanlık Tezi, Adli Tıp Kurumu, İstanbul, 1992.
  17. Şahin MF. Kıl Kökünde Meydana Gelen Postmortem Değişimlerin mikroskopik İncelemesi. Uzmanlık Tezi, Adli Tıp Kurumu, İstanbul, 2009.
  18. Oien CT. Forensic Hair Comparison: Background Information for Interpretation. Forensic Science Communications 2009;11 2.
  19. Kobilinsky L, Liotti TF, Oeser-Sweat J. Biological evidence science and criminal investigation. DNA: Forensic and Legal Applications. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2005:40-2.
  20. Eckert WG, SH James. The role of the forensic laboratory. In: Eckert WG, ed. Introduction to Forensic Sciences. 2nd ed., Florida: CRC Press, 1997:33-41.
  21. Bisbing RE, Wolner MF. Microscopical discrimination of twin’s head hair. J Forensic Sci 1984;29 3:780-6.
  22. Deedrick DW, Koch SL. Microscopy of Hair Part I: A practical guide and manual of human hairs. Forensic Science Communications, 2004;6 1.
  23. Deedrick DW, Koch SL. Microscopy of Hair Part II: A practical guide and manual for animal hairs. Forensic Science Com- munications, 2004;6 3.
  24. Houck MM, Bisbing RE, Tani G. Watkins TG, Harmon RP. Locard exchange: The science of forensic hair comparisons and the admissibility of hair comparison evidence: Frye and Daubert considered. Modern Microscopy Journal Online, 2004. Available at: http://www.modernmicroscopy.com/ main.asp?article=36&print=true&pix =true Cited: September 17, 2013.
  25. Deedrick DW. Hairs, fibers, crime and evidence. Forensic Science Communications, 2000;3 2.
  26. Houck MM, Budowle B. Correlation of microscopic and mitochondrial DNA hair comparisons. J Forensic Sci 2002;47 5:1- 4.
  27. Gaudette BD, Keeping ES. An attempt at determining probabilities in human scalp hair comparison. J Forensic Sci 1974;19 3:599-606. 13. Strauss M. Forensic characterization of human hair I. The Microscope 1983;31:15-29.
  28. Scientific Working Group on Materials Analysis. Forensic Human Hair Examination Guidelines. Forensic Science Communications, 2005;7 2.
  29. Gaudette BD. Some further thoughts on probabilities and human hair comparisons. J Forensic Sci 1978;23 4:758- 63.
  30. Kirk PL. Human hair studies. I. General Considerations of hair individualization and it’s forensic importance. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 1940;31 4:486-96.
  31. Oien CT. Forensic Hair Comparison: Background Information for Interpretation. Forensic Science Communications 2009;11 2.
  32. Bisbing RE, Wolner MF. Microscopical discrimination of twin’s head hair. J Forensic Sci 1984;29 3:780-6.