New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

"Necrobiome" Reveals a Corpse's Time of Death

The microbial ecosystems inhabiting corpses could help forensic scientists determine a person’s time of death, even after almost two months. Christopher Intagliata reports.

Getty Images/Thinkstock Images (MARS)

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Tens of trillions of microbes call our living bodies home. But when we die? "The first thing that happens is basically ecosystem collapse—where you have a tremendous loss of diversity." Nathan Lents, a molecular biologist at John Jay College in New York. "And then it bottoms out and starts to get rich again." 

That microbial phoenix, rising from our extinguished mortal coils, is called the "necrobiome." Lents and his team tracked the necrobiome, by swabbing the ears and noses of 21 cadavers at a body farm in Tennessee. It's a sort of outdoor lab for forensic scientists, where bodies are left to the elements to decompose. 

They tracked the genetic signatures of that microbial community as it waned and waxed after death. And they used that data to build an algorithm that could pinpoint a corpse's time of death, to an accuracy of just two summertime days. "And that held out for up to six to seven weeks. And that's way better than entomology can tell you." Entomology being the study of the insects that colonize a corpse. "Entomology's okay for giving you upper and lower limits within five to seven days, but beyond that, entomology's not helpful." 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The study is in the journal PLoS ONE. [Hunter R. Johnson et al., A Machine Learning Approach for Using the Postmortem Skin Microbiome to Estimate the Postmortem Interval]

The method isn't quite ready for primetime. There's still a lot of 'biological noise' in the system. "We're talking about living things here. Well... living and dead things." But as with any machine learning, more info will help it see beyond the noise. "It will forever learn. So the more data we pump into this system, the better it will get." Ultimately, Lents says, the algorithm will have to be smart enough to hold up in a court of law, when it could determine the fate of someone accused of turning someone into a corpse.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe