Chemical elemental composition and human taphonomy: A comparative analysis between skeletonised and preserved individuals from six Portuguese public cemeteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In Portugal, it is common practice to reuse burial graves in cemeteries with exhumations occurring after a minimum period of three years after entombment. However, if the human remains still retain soft tissues when the grave is opened, inhumations must continue for successive periods of two years until complete skeletonization is achieved. For the past decade, several Portuguese public cemeteries have been struggling with the lack of burial space mainly due to a slow cadaveric decomposition. As such, this work aims to understand if the chemical elemental concentrations found in the depositional environment of deceased individuals is influencing human taphonomy. METHODS: A total of 112 soil samples were collected from graves of five Portuguese public cemeteries and the concentration of 28 chemical elements was measured by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). A total of 56 head hair samples and 19 fingernail samples were also collected from cadaveric remains and analysed for the same purpose. RESULTS: Overall, all matrices showed statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) between skeletonised and preserved individuals. Although it was considered that the preserved bodies would display higher elemental concentrations than the skeletonised ones, this hypothesis was not confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: The authors believe that changes in the burial conditions over time may have enable the disintegration of soft tissues even if they were initially preserved due to the presence of chemical elements. Similar studies on a global scale should be considered as they could bring together distinct perspectives and lead to more comprehensive and innovative solutions for cemetery management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".