↓ Skip to main content

Forensic entomology

Overview of attention for article published in The Science of Nature, January 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
377 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
584 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Forensic entomology
Published in
The Science of Nature, January 2004
DOI 10.1007/s00114-003-0493-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jens Amendt, Roman Krettek, Richard Zehner

Abstract

Necrophagous insects are important in the decomposition of cadavers. The close association between insects and corpses and the use of insects in medicocriminal investigations is the subject of forensic entomology. The present paper reviews the historical background of this discipline, important postmortem processes, and discusses the scientific basis underlying attempts to determine the time interval since death. Using medical techniques, such as the measurement of body temperature or analysing livor and rigor mortis, time since death can only be accurately measured for the first two or three days after death. In contrast, by calculating the age of immature insect stages feeding on a corpse and analysing the necrophagous species present, postmortem intervals from the first day to several weeks can be estimated. These entomological methods may be hampered by difficulties associated with species identification, but modern DNA techniques are contributing to the rapid and authoritative identification of necrophagous insects. Other uses of entomological data include the toxicological examination of necrophagous larvae from a corpse to identify and estimate drugs and toxicants ingested by the person when alive and the proof of possible postmortem manipulations. Forensic entomology may even help in investigations dealing with people who are alive but in need of care, by revealing information about cases of neglect.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 584 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Malaysia 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 560 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 136 23%
Student > Master 101 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 9%
Researcher 44 8%
Student > Postgraduate 34 6%
Other 85 15%
Unknown 134 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 254 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 40 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 5%
Chemistry 25 4%
Environmental Science 18 3%
Other 65 11%
Unknown 151 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 90. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2022.
All research outputs
#472,104
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from The Science of Nature
#60
of 2,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#612
of 147,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Science of Nature
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,263 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 147,030 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.