Looking Back, Looking Forward
/
As we approach the end of December, it’s natural to look back at the closing year and reflect on all we’ve accomplished. 2012 has certainly been a busy year full of notable moments for Ann and I on our writing journey, including:
In March, we sold DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT for publication in May 2013. When Ann and I set out in 2009 to start a new series with an eye to professional publication, we really had no idea what we were getting into. So to culminate that effort with successfully selling our book and launching our series was a huge moment for us.
We outlined, wrote and revised the second book in our series, A FLAME IN THE WIND OF DEATH. That book has been turned into our editor and we are hopeful of a publication date early in 2014.
We wrote a proposal for standalone biothriller, BLOWBACK. We’re currently on submission with that proposal.
We got to see cover art for DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT for the first time. It’s funny how the instant your book gets a cover, it suddenly gets real.
I attended Bloody Words 2012 in Toronto, where I not only got to reconnect with old writing friends and make new ones, but I got to finally meet my agent Nicole Resciniti in person. Nic was every bit as wonderful as I suspected she’d be from our email and phone conversations, and it was great to connect with her on a personal level. Granted, when you compare meeting Nic to how long it took to finally meet Ann in person (3 years and 5 novels later!), 18 months doesn’t seem so bad.
We continued to blog regularly, expanding on our author brand of forensic anthropology and forensic sciences as they apply to current criminal investigations and historical whodunits.
Skeleton Keys was named one of the top forensic blogs on the web for the second time.
On a personal note, 2012 had its ups and downs: For me, the year marked the end of a nearly twenty-year career in HIV research, six months of unemployment and then a move into Dengue fever research. For Ann, everyday life became an unforeseen challenge after breaking her ankle and the associated surgery and recovery.
Looking ahead, there are many possibilities on our horizon:
We’re starting a new Leigh Abbott/Matt Lowell novella to bridge the gap between DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT and A FLAME IN THE WIND OF DEATH. Mystery series can be very nicely set up for the occasional shorter installment, and ours is no exception. We’re looking forward to moving our characters into some new situations.
Planning and writing the third book in the series.
Having the opportunity to expand on our proposal for BLOWBACK, turning it into a full-fledged novel and maybe a second series.
Brainstorming for new non-series projects.
I’ll be attending at least two mystery conferences. At this point I’m looking at Bouchercon in September, and New England Crime Bake in November.
And, of course, our release for DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT in May, which will be very exciting. We’ll have more information on that for you all in the coming months.
2012 has been a very good year overall, and we’re very much looking forward to what 2013 holds for us.
Ann and I are going to be taking a few well-deserved weeks off from blogging as we enjoy the holidays. The very best of the season to you and yours, and we’ll see you on our return on January 8, 2013.
Photo credit: hpaich
Sex in Crime Fiction
/
I’ve had a few discussions around the topic of sex in crime fiction lately. There seems to be a general feeling that sex—as it relates to the protagonist—doesn’t belong anywhere in this genre, and I have to admit that I’m not sure why.
Some crime fiction can be fairly dark. Many crime writers don’t shy away from describing the most terrible of slayings, and Ann and I are among them. One way to convey the horror of a life being taken is to describe the sheer brutality of the violation as seen through the protagonist's eyes. For us, this savagery segues directly to the unforgiving forensics of the investigation, so that type of descriptive storytelling is an important component of our writing. It sets the scene and the atmosphere, and allows the reader to experience the same horror that drives our protagonists.
So the question is—why do some crime writers, who describe death to the nth degree, consider sex to be a taboo subject, especially within the bounds of a relationship? Many of these writers are more likely to ‘close the door’, leaving that aspect of the protagonist’s life to the readers imagination, but this feels like a cop out to me. If you're delving into a multi-faceted character's life, doesn't that also include his or her personal life? As a reader, don't you want to know what drives the characters in all ways?
To be honest, writing a death scene is easier than writing a good sex scene. And it’s interesting that while no one assumes you’ve murdered someone and are drawing on the experience to write a slaying, everyone assumes that they’re looking directly into your personal life when you write a sex scene. This is a bigger issue for erotica writers, but it still applies to anyone writing this kind of material. And then there’s always the fear you might get laughed at for making the attempt in the first place.
In our series, we took that step and gave our characters a scene like this in A FLAME IN THE WIND OF DEATH. There was a definite lead up to it in the first book and another moment earlier in the second book, so it didn’t feel right to suddenly close the door on them at that point. Would it have been easier to? Absolutely. I always find sex scenes are a struggle to get right; they need to be an emotional moment, not a tab-A-into-slot-B mechanical description. But would it be fair to a reader who is emotionally invested in the characters and their relationship to suddenly have to imagine their big moment? I didn’t think so.
Even though we write crime fiction, it’s not one-note storytelling. The relationship between the male and female leads is crucial to work of the team and the over-arcing storyline, and it deserved a little time and attention.
So what do you think about mixing sex and genre fiction? Do you feel that it belongs only in the romance genre and you’re doing your readers a disservice if you mix genres? Or do you feel that readers like a complex story with different areas of the protagonists’ lives fully fleshed out? I’d love to hear your opinions, so please share!
Photo credit: madcowk
Forensics 101: Cadaver Dogs
/
Police and search and rescue units are sometimes assisted by service dogs—animals that are specifically trained to search out the source of very specific smells like explosives, drugs, paper money, firearms, or people. Cadaver dogs are specially trained to identify the smell of decomposition, and they can be paramount in determining the location of missing human remains, even when those remains are scattered by scavengers.
When a body decomposes, a host of very aromatic sulfur- and nitrogen-based organic compounds are produced. While they may smell putrid to a human in close quarters, the human nose is simply not sensitive enough to detect this smell at great distances or if the body is buried or covered by running water. A dog’s nose is, on average, 1,000 times more sensitive than a human’s, and some breeds are even more so. Some of the more popular breeds used in police or search and rescue units due to their extra-sensitive noses are German Shepherds, basset hounds, blood hounds, beagles, Labrador retrievers, and spaniels.
Dogs and their handlers are trained using decomposing animal sources, autopsy samples, and desiccated human bones, as well as simulated decomposition compounds. One of the challenges of cadaver dog training is training detection across the spectrum of decay scents from putrefaction to skeletonization so the animal can identify a body at any stage postmortem.
The animals are trained to be both trailing and air scent dogs. Trailing scents are useful if a body has been moved and bodily fluids have fallen to the ground; the dog will follow the scent along the ground until it can find the source of the trail. Air scent dogs will follow an odor in the breeze that is blown outwards in a widening cone shape from the source. The smell will become stronger the closer the dog comes to the source, and the dog is trained to follow that more concentrated scent.
When a cadaver dog locates the source of the compound it is trained to recognize, it will ‘alert’. The alert is specific to each animal or trainer and is instantly recognizable to that trainer—a bark, or the animal sitting or lying down to indicate recognition of the smell in that particular location.
With the help of handlers and fully trained cadaver dogs, human remains can be found following clandestine burials, natural disasters or missing persons searches. Once the remains are found, then the process of identification and determining the cause of death can begin, allowing closure for the family, and, perhaps, justice for the dead.
Photo credit: Canadian Search Dog Association
15 Grammar Goofs That Make You Look Silly
/I’m taking a brief break this week from my usual factual posts because I recently stumbled across an infographic I thought hit on some really great points. Whether you write professionally, just for fun, or only for communication purposes, being grammatically correct is very important. Listed below are 15 common errors that can not only make you look silly, but can also sometimes totally change the meaning of what you’re trying to convey. Thanks to Copyblogger for allowing sharing of their material.
For me, it’s definitely ‘It’s/Its’ that tries to trip me up. What about you?
The Next Big Thing Blog Hop–All About My WIP
/
I’ve been doubly tagged to contribute to the Next Big Thing Blog Hop by two lovely and talented writers—Kate SeRine and Anna Simpson. Kate is the author of the Transplanted Tales series. Her first novel, RED, was released in August 2012, and the sequel, THE BETTER TO SEE YOU, is due out in February 2013. Anna is an aspiring novelist, currently hard at work on WHITE LIGHT.
Rules for The Next Big Thing Blog Hop:
***Use this format for your post
***Answer the ten questions about your current WIP (work in progress)
***Tag five other writers/bloggers and add their links so we can hop over and meet them.
Ten Interview Questions for the Next Big Thing:
What is your working title of your book?
My current WIP is A FLAME IN THE WIND OF DEATH, the sequel to DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT. Currently, I’m working on the first set of revision notes from our editor.
Where did the idea come from for the book?
I can’t say a lot about this without giving away too much, but the original idea came from one of our crit team members who saw something she thought would appeal to us (thanks, Lisa!). As soon as we looked into it, we knew we had the basis for a great story. We’ve been sitting on this idea since 2009.
What genre does your book fall under?
Where DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT falls more in the forensic thriller category, A FLAME IN THE WIND OF DEATH is more of a classic forensic mystery.
Which actors would you choose to play your characters in a movie rendition?
This question is easy because we based our characters right from the start on Dylan McDermott and Nicki Aycox. In some ways it’s funny that they were our visual inspiration because they once starred in a TV show together, but I never saw a single episode of it.
What is the one-sentence synopsis of your book?
Our logline is actually two sentences long, so you're getting that instead...
At Halloween, Salem, Massachusetts is a hot spot for Witch and tourist alike. But when a murder spree begins, a cop and scientist must team up to find the killer before a media circus unleashes, panic ensues, and more victims are killed.
Will your book be self-published or represented by an agency?
I’m represented by the fabulous Nicole Resciniti of The Seymour Agency.
How long did it take you to write the first draft of your manuscript?
This manuscript definitely rolled out faster than usual because I wrote a lot of it while laid off from the lab after funding ran out. Once I’d done my job searching for the day, I used my free time to write, so a large portion of this book was written in about an 8-week period. But then I put it away while Ann and I worked on our biothriller project. Once it aged a little, we went back to revise it.
What other books would you compare this story to within your genre?
Kathy Reichs’ Temperance Brennan series is the obvious first comparison, simply because of the forensic anthropology angle of the science in the book. But from a male-female lead/group dynamic perspective, it’s much more like the ‘In Death’ series by J.D. Robb.
Who or what inspired you to write this book?
I used to write purely for fun in high school (waves at co-conspirator R.J. Anderson!), but I stopped when I went to University for my science degree. I got married, had two daughters and worked full time for years before the bug bit again. After working in the same lab for about 15 years, I found my interest drifting back to it again. I met Ann and we formed our partnership. After writing 5 novels for practice, we decided to give professional publication our best shot with a new series. This is the second book in that series.
What else about your book might pique the reader’s interest?
Our specialty is the real scientific/forensic content that we build into the mystery plot. And for those that like a little romance with their mystery, A FLAME IN THE WIND OF DEATH gets pretty spicy as the male and female leads really move forward in their relationship.
I am now tagging the following fabulous writers:
Jen Blood: Indie author Jen has two fantastic novels out in her Erin Solomon series; her newest installment, SOUTHERN CROSS, is due to be released in March of 2013.
Barbara McCormick-Thomas: Dual novelist and screenwriter, Barbara can do it all!
Marisa Cleveland: Marisa is not only a romance writer, but she’s also The Seymour Agency’s newest agent.
Lea Nolan: Lea’s debut YA/MG crossover novel CONJURE released last month and she has just survived her first blog tour.
Lane Heymont: Fantasy author Lane’s debut novel, The FREEDMAN AND THE PHAROH’S STAFF, is soon to be released by Sunbury Press.
Photo credit: ~Brenda-Starr~
Forensics 101: Tool Marks in Bone
/When skeletonized human remains are recovered, sometimes the only evidence police and scientists have to determine cause of death is the bones themselves. The bones are examined to identify any remnants of tool marks—also called kerf marks—that might indicate a traumatic injury. If the body has been dismembered, those kerf marks can lead directly to the tool(s) used postmortem, even if they might not directly suggest a cause of death.
Any sharp implement applied to bone with sufficient force will leave a distinctive imprint, be it scavenger teeth or a cutting tool. Examination of the bone both macroscopically (using the naked eye) and microscopically (using a light microscope/scanning electron microscope for magnification) can provide crucial information, since each tool leaves a characteristic mark that can assist in its identification.
Types of cutting tools:
Knives: Knives are narrow bladed and leave a corresponding narrow ‘V’-shaped trough in the bone. They are single or double-bladed (double-bladed knives can leave an opposite ‘V’-shaped trough in surrounding bone) and tend to leave behind only microscopic striations.
Saw: Saw blades come in many different form factors, but uniformly leave a wider, square-bottomed trough in bone. They tend to leave distinguishable striations that are easily seen by the naked eye. Individual blade and tooth size can be identified based on the striations, as can the blade type—ie. straight or rotary. Saw kerfs often have characteristic accessory marks, such as false start notches, especially when manual saws are used.
Axe: Like a knife, an axe leaves a smooth ‘V’-shaped trough in the bone, but the defect is very wide and is often significantly deeper due to the lever action of swinging an axe. These kerf marks are often accompanied by microscopic or macroscopic impact fractures and/or flaking surrounding the contact site.
Besides providing information about the type of tool used, kerf marks also provide contextual information, including the handedness of the attacker, the relative positions of attacker and victim, whether the wound was self-inflicted, and the motion of the blade (cut vs. stab). With this information, police can determine not only the most likely weapon used, but how the murder was committed, and these details can often be used to definitely identify the murderer.
Cover Reveal: DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT
/
One of the most exciting moments in the career of a debut author is when her virtual book starts to become tangible—the digital product she’s spent so long working on slowly becomes ink and paper. Part of that journey is complete when an artistic team takes the author’s vision and turns it into graphic art for the cover.
Ann and I had that moment last week as we finally got a sneak peek at the cover for DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT. For the longest time, we’ve had a vision of what we wanted to see on the cover, centering on the concepts of the coastal salt marshes in Essex, Massachusetts and the strong forensic/forensic anthropology angles involved in the story. When the cover was finally unveiled, we were both very pleased with the results. Our thanks to Five Star/Gale Cengage and ENC Graphics for all their hard work on this project.
So now, without further ado, we’re thrilled to release the cover for DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT, releasing May 15, 2013:
So, what do you think?
A Writer with a Day Job
/
I’m going on a bit of a tangent this week and breaking away from my usual theme of forensics and writing to touch on another aspect of my life—my day job. Like many writers out there, writing may be my passion, but I have a responsibility to help my husband support our family financially, so I work full time. I worked in the field of HIV research for 20 years, but last winter my lab downsized, and I started looking for a new position. Last July, I joined a dynamic research group specializing in infectious diseases. We study a range of diseases, including pneumococcal infections and influenza, but our big project is a very large, international study of dengue fever.
In the map above, the areas in blue indicate the current risk for dengue virus infection, and the pins in red indicate areas where the disease is spreading or has been carried by travellers. Currently 40% of the world’s population lives in areas where the virus is endemic, leading to an estimated 50 million cases of dengue fever annually. Of those cases, 500,000 patients require hospitalization and 20,000 – 25,000 patients die of the disease. The virus spreads to humans by two types of mosquitos and the incidence of the disease matches the geography inhabited by these insects. Because of global warming and the northern spread of the Aedes Albopictus mosquito into the southeastern United States, the CDC has classified the dengue virus as a Biodefense Category A pathogen; a category that encompasses the most dangerous of the infectious diseases due to their easy transmission, high mortality rate and lack of effective treatment.
The large majority of patients infected with dengue virus show no symptoms at all or only present with a mild illness including fever, aches, a mild skin rash and joint pain—leading to the colloquial name for this disease: bone break fever. But approximately 5% progress to severe illness, and a subset of those exhibit life-threatening disease (dengue hemorrhagic fever and dengue shock syndrome), including symptoms such as platelet loss, abdominal bleeding, fluid accumulation in the chest, low blood pressure and organ dysfunction. There are four main serotypes of dengue virus, but previous infection with one serotype doesn’t protect you from the other three. In fact, a subsequent infection with a different serotype significantly increases the chances of life-threatening disease. Once infected, there is no effective anti-viral treatment, and all hospital staff can do is keep the patient hydrated.
An electron micrograph showing a cluster of dengue virus particles
The mystery with dengue infection is why there is so much variability in the range of symptoms. Over 80% of those infected have either no symptoms (many don’t even know they’ve ever been infected) or only very mild symptoms. So what causes some people to progress to severe or fatal disease? Our team hypothesizes that there are common genetic variations in certain genes that affect the immune system and how it responds to the infection, and it is these variations that predispose some individuals to dengue hemorrhagic fever. To this end, we are studying over 9,000 participants from 10 international sites including Mexico, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Columbia and Sri Lanka over a 5 year period. We’ll look at the patients’ DNA, RNA and serum to identify variations in their genes and antibodies. Ideally, we’ll find a specific gene or genes that affect the way the body reacts to dengue infection.
The long-term goal in dengue research has always been to produce a vaccine or treatment that will assist those most at risk for serious infection. Hopefully, armed with this information, we’ll be able to drastically reduce the number of 25,000 dead annually.
Photo credit: DengueMap and Wikimedia Commons
Forensic Case Files: The Princes in the Tower
/
In the last Forensic Case File, I discussed the remains of Richard III, finally discovered in Leicester (pending confirmation). Richard III is infamous for supposedly killing his two nephews, Edward V, 13, and his younger brother Richard, 10, the sons of Edward IV. But because Parliament ruled Edward IV’s marriage invalid and his sons illegitimate, the crown legally went to Richard III in June of 1483. That month, Richard sent his two nephews to the Tower of London. They were seen playing on the grounds over the following months, but were never seen again after the summer of 1483. Surely they had been killed, but the question was by who and when?
The two most famous accounts of the deaths of the young princes were written by Thomas More, Henry VIII’s Lord Chancellor, and William Shakespeare, the famous poet and playwright. Both accounts paint Richard III with a dark brush, portraying him as a villainous monster. But the truth of the matter is that both accounts were written by men who were never witness to the supposed crime—More was eight years old when Richard fell in battle, and Shakespeare was born seventy-nine years later. History tells that More’s account of Richard III came from John Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury during Henry VII’s reign and a sworn enemy of Richard III. It’s a well-known fact that history is written by the victors; in this case, the House of Tudor was legendary for removing any and all rivals to the throne. It’s not much of a stretch to suppose that the story of Richard III as a menacing hunchback who murdered his nephews was used to blacken the name of a defeated rival family, the House of York.
The truth of the matter is that Richard III had no concrete reason to kill the boys and nothing to gain from their deaths. His claim to the throne came with the approval of both the English public and Parliament. Had Edward IV’s marriage been upheld and his royal line remained intact, there were three other male heirs closer to the throne than Richard, so simply killing his nephews would not have assured him a place as monarch.
So if Richard III wasn’t responsible, who else stood to gain from the princes’ deaths?
In her classic 1951 novel, The Daughter of Time, novelist Josephine Tey makes a convincing argument that Henry Tudor had to most to gain following Richard III’s death at the Battle of Bosworth Field when he was crowned Henry VII.
Henry never missed an opportunity to vilify Richard posthumously, yet when he came to London he never remarked on the fact that the boys were missing from the Tower. It’s been suggested that he would have happily pinned the disappearance and murder of the boys on the fallen king simply to make himself look more favourable by comparison. But perhaps he didn’t want to bring the princes’ disappearance to light because he had ordered their deaths. The boys were also a threat to him—following the death of Richard III, Henry VII repealed the Titulus Regius statute that made Richard III king, nullifying Richard’s reign while simultaneous declaring Edward V King of England and his brother the heir. The boys were a direct threat to his reign as monarch. The boys were never seen after 1483, but it is possible that they were still alive in the Tower as late as 1485 when Henry VII arrived in London. Killing the princes would have ended the last remaining hope that the House of York would be able to reclaim the throne.
Officially, the murder has been laid at the feet of James Tyrrell, an English knight in the service of the House of York and under Richard’s command. Nearly twenty years after the rise of Henry VII, Tyrrell supposedly confessed to smothering the boys and was hanged for his crime. But there was never any transcript of the confession, no formal charges were laid, nor was there ever a trial. In fact, the account was only released after Tyrrell himself was already dead. According to the reported confession, the only witness to the crime conveniently died at the Battle of Bosworth Field along with Richard III.
In 1674, nearly 200 years after the princes’ disappearance, the skeletons of two children were found in a wooden box beneath a stone staircase during renovations in the White Tower. Since it was assumed that these were the remains of the missing princes, the bones were interred with royal honour in an urn in one of the walls of the Henry VII Chapel in Westminster Abbey.
In 1933, Professor William Wright, one of the foremost anatomists of his day, was granted permission to examine the remains. Inside the urn Dr. Wright found the incomplete remains of two children he determined to be between the ages of 7–11 and 11–13 years of age, mixed with several animal bones and a handful of rusty nails. There was no sign of any skeletal trauma on the remains, supporting the theory that the princes had been suffocated. But as the sex could not be determined on the pre-pubescent bones and DNA analysis was decades away, that was the only information learned and the bones were re-interred. Current osteological research now gives scientists methods to determine age of pre-pubescent individuals (although it remains a somewhat inexact science) and DNA analysis could identify the remains if a female family member could be found. Since relatives found to test against Richard III’s remains are not in the same female line as Edward IV’s sons, a new family member in the maternal line would have to be located for confirmation.
So, the mystery surrounding the death and identity of the lost princes remains. If scientists are allowed to examine the remains again, some new answers may come to light. But, unfortunately, it remains a real possibility that the fate of the princes may remain lost to the ages.
Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons
Forensics 101: DNA Profiling for Identification
/
Last week, I covered DNA as a tool for identifying remains. This week, I’m going to discuss how scientists test DNA to prove an identifying match.
DNA strands contain different regions, many of which are genes that code for essential protein products. But a very large proportion of sequences don’t code for any currently known genes. These sequences also contain short tandem repeats (STR)—small snippets of DNA that are two to six base pairs long and repeat from three to one hundred times in a row. The locations of these repetitive sections are called variable number tandem repeats (VNTR). Genetically speaking, unrelated individuals will have different numbers of repeated STR segments at known VNTR locations, but related family members will share similar numbers of repeated segments. Since human offspring share a combination of traits from both parents, the power of DNA profiling lies in analyzing numerous segments to definitively prove identification. In North America, it’s standard protocol to analyze thirteen specific locations simultaneously.
Scientists use the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to examine known VNTR locations. PCR is an assay used to amplify small amounts of specific DNA sequences so they can be visualized later on a gel (we’ll look at PCR in more detail in a future Forensics 101 post). The picture above illustrates typical PCR results. In this case, a gel shows the difference in length of the D1S80 VNTR location of six unrelated individuals, flanked on each side by a marker of known size. As you can see, the pattern for each individual subject is different in each vertical lane.
An example of DNA profiling between a father (1), mother (3) and child (2).
There are two types of matches in DNA profiling—identity and inheritance. In identity matching, the unknown sample is tested against a known individual’s DNA. If the two samples match exactly, then the unknown person is identified as the known donor. In inheritance matching, the unknown sample is tested against a sample drawn from a potential family member. If parents are used as donors, then each band in the unknown sample must match with one of the two parents. If a more distant relation is used, then degrees of relatedness are calculated into the expected results.
The bottom line of this testing is that the unknown sample must be tested against a sample (blood, hair, tissue etc.) of known origin. In the case of Richard III’s ancestors, separated by five centuries from the king himself, genomic DNA profiling as described above simply wouldn’t be feasible due to the number of generations separating Richard III and his current ancestors. But when this same method is applied to mitochondrial DNA, because of the consistency of maternal transmission, identical or near identical results are expected between family members, even those separated by multiple generations.
Next week, we’ll look at the historical details surrounding the Princes in the Tower, the young boys Richard III is accused of murdering. Nearly one hundred years after their disappearance, bones were recovered at the Tower of London. But where they of the missing princes? See you next week to find out…
Photo credit: PaleWhaleGale and Magnus Manske
Forensics 101: Tracing Lineage Through Maternal Mitochondrial DNA
/
Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA)Last week in a post on the potential discovery of Richard III’s remains, I wrote that scientists hope to confirm the identity of the remains based on DNA, specifically mitochondrial DNA. Over the next few weeks, I’m going to explain DNA identification, starting with the basics and then branching out into how it is used to name the dead.
DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is the code of life, the genetic information contained in every cell in the form of twenty-three pairs of chromosomes (except for sperm and eggs cells which have twenty-three single chromosomes). The information contained in this genomic DNA specifies everything about us, from how we look to which health problems we’ll have an increased likelihood of developing. But there is also another kind of DNA contained in our cells—mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA).
Mitochondria are the power houses in our cells, the organelles or cellular structures that are responsible for producing the chemical energy required for every cellular activity—from protein production to ion transport to cellular reproduction. But unlike other organelles, mitochondria have their own unique tiny DNA genome—mtDNA. Due to the process of human fertilization, these small bits of DNA are transmitted in family lineages only through the maternal line.
Electron micrograph of two mitochondria
An egg cell is a stripped down version of a typical cell in the body; essentially it only contains a nucleus carrying twenty-three single chromosomes plus several hundred mitochondria in the cytoplasm. A sperm cell is a small sack of DNA attached to a long tail for mobility, the base of which is packed with energy producing mitochondria to fuel the journey. At the moment of fertilization, the tiny sperm head fuses with the egg membrane and injects its DNA while the tail drops off and is lost. As a result, the only DNA inserted into the egg cell is the genomic DNA contained within the sperm head. All mitochondrial DNA that is then replicated as the fertilized zygote splits from one cell into approximately one hundred trillion cells comes solely from the mother. Fortunately, due to the nature of its sequences, mtDNA has a very low mutation rate. In other words, the same mtDNA is passed from grandmother to mother to child through the generations. Genetic testing of specific sequences of those mtDNA samples, even if separated by many generations, can definitively prove a family match.
Due to the number of copies of mitochondrial DNA in each cell (providing approximately five hundred identical copies of each gene versus two copies on the cell’s genomic DNA), forensic anthropologists often are more successful recovering mtDNA than genomic DNA from ancient and historical samples. So the combination of DNA yield and the consistency of the maternal line can provide identification, even for remains over five hundred years old.
Next week we’ll look more specifically at the kind of testing used to make a genetic match between samples providing conclusive DNA evidence for identification.
Photo credit: ynse and Louisa Howard
Forensic Case Files: Richard III's Remains Finally Found in Leicester?
/
Richard III, who ruled England from 1483 to 1485, was the last of the legendary Plantagenet line that included such rulers as Henry II, Richard the Lionheart (Richard I), John Lackland (John of England), and Edward Longshanks (Edward I). His death in 1485 during the Battle of Bosworth Field ended the historic War of the Roses between the Houses of York and Lancaster, and led to the reign of the House of Tudor when Henry VII became king.
Richard III’s rise to power was somewhat unexpected. Following the death of his brother, Edward IV, Richard was named as Lord Protector for England for his nephew, 12-year old Edward V. But when Edward IV’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville was called into question and then invalidated because of Edward IV’s previous and binding legal contract to marry another woman, Edward V was declared illegitimate and Richard III came to power.
Richard III may be best known for his part in what is now known as the ‘Princes in the Tower’—the disappearance of Edward IV’s two sons from the Tower of London in 1483, shortly after Richard was crowned king. We’ll examine the forensic evidence concerning the princes in our next Forensic Case File.
On August 22, 1485, Richard led a cavalry charge into the thick of his enemy’s forces in an attempt to strike directly at Henry Tudor. Legend says that he came within feet of Henry before being surrounded and struck down by a poleaxe blow so violent, it drove his helmet into his skull. Richard’s naked body was then brought to Leicester where it was first put on display, and then buried at Greyfriars Church. The exact location of the burial was lost to time following the church’s demolition in 1536 and later development of the area.
But members of the Richard III Society, the University of Leicester Archeology Department and the Leicester City Council undertook to find Richard’s remains. On August 25, 2012 it was announced that three trenches had been dug under a municipal parking lot, uncovering not only the original walls from the cloister and church, but a single set of human remains buried near the altar. But are these Richard’s remains?
At this point, forensic anthropologists have collected strong circumstantial evidence. The remains belong to a battle-scarred adult man, seemingly buried without clothes, with an arrowhead lodged between two vertebrae and a horrible gash in the skull. But most telling is the curvature of the spine from scoliosis which would have resulted in the living man standing with one shoulder higher than the other. Richard III was rumoured to be a hunchback (as portrayed by Shakespeare) but it is unlikely such an accomplished soldier would have such a severe disability. But a mild curvature of the spine might account for the seed of what later became legend.
Forensic anthropologists hope to definitively identify the remains using mitrochondrial DNA, a type of DNA passed down through the generations via the maternal bloodline. Three Canadians from London, Ontario are the only remaining relatives of Richard III through the maternal line and their DNA will be tested against samples taken from the femur and molars of the remains. Scientists are hopeful of a match, but the age of the samples and the resulting quality of the DNA is a concern. They hope to have a definitive answer within the next three months.
Next week, in our next Forensics 101 post, we’re going to examine how mitrochondrial DNA can be used to identify the dead by comparing their sequences to those of their living relatives.
Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons
What Makes a Good Critique Team Member?
/
This past Friday, I had the great pleasure of sending the manuscript for A FLAME IN THE WIND OF DEATH to my critique team. After months of work, and especially after 2 or 3 weeks where Ann and I killed ourselves to get it ready on schedule, we’re finally enjoying a short break while someone else carries the ball.
Ann and I were very lucky that we had a great group of beta readers for DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT. But from that group, we narrowed it down to a smaller group that we consider our core critique team. So, what makes up a good critique team?
- Everyone brings something different to the table: Our team is made up of an editor, two authors and a reader. Sharon, our editor, has a sharp eye for language, and never fails to catch our small errors while still seeing the big picture. Margaret and Jen are each excellent authors in their own right. As such, they’re skilled in storytelling and identifying strengths and weakness in plot or characterization. Lisa is a reader, but, more than that, she’s our technical advisor and our logical thinker. A 20-year veteran of a northern California fire department, she’s been essential to us during the writing of FLAME. But she was just as essential through DEAD because she knows law enforcement officers almost as well as firefighters, and was always able to catch our logical missteps.
- The ability to give constructive criticism: This is actually a real skill. To give constructive criticism, team members not only need to be able to pinpoint what isn’t working for them, but also why it doesn’t, and then give suggestions about how to fix it. All four team members are great at this—this situation doesn’t make sense because of this, so why don’t you try that instead? They see the issues that we don’t simply because we’re too close to the story.
- Willingness to help out on a moment’s notice and stick to a schedule: I try not to call on my team at a moment’s notice, but regardless of that intention, I’ve done it to them twice in the past. To make it worse, one of those times was two weeks before Christmas 2011 as we were sprinting to complete an edit our publisher requested. Each time, they’ve all willingly jumped in and stayed on schedule, even as Christmas loomed large. I always try to keep them in the loop, giving them at least a month’s notice and then setting a hard deadline two weeks before, but sometimes that’s not always possible. Luckily, this time, I was able to do that for them.
How important is a good critique team? They’re absolutely crucial to our writing process. Some authors have only one critique partner, but I like having a team to work with us because they each help out in different ways. Put them together and their feedback is essential to the production of a solid manuscript that I then feel confident sending out to professional editors.
For other writers out there, do you work with a crit partner or team? And do you feel their input is paramount to the success of your manuscript?
Those $%&@# Crutch Words!
/
Ann and I are currently working on the last revision of A FLAME IN THE WIND OF DEATH before sending the manuscript to our critique team to tear apart over the next few weeks. The manuscript was written earlier this year and we had the opportunity to put it aside for a few months to ‘age’. But it’s amazing what pops out at you when you suddenly have some perspective on your work. One of those things is the use of crutch words.
The most important aspect of writing a first draft is to get the words down. Whether you are a pantster or a plotter, you simply want to get the story sketched out, hitting all the plot points and emotional notes while still including the necessary character development. But, in doing so, often authors fall back on using familiar words or phrases—those infamous crutch words—to an unhealthy extent.
I remember when we first started revisions on DEAD, WITHOUT A STONE TO TELL IT with our agent Nicole. There was a somewhat ridiculous amount of looking and glancing, accompanied by an awful lot of eyebrow movement. I think if I’d used the word ‘gaze’ or ‘that’ one more time, my word processor (and my editor!) might have gone on strike in protest. In an effort to write the story in my head, I’d fallen back on crutch words.
Now, this kind of writing is perfectly acceptable in a first draft. In fact, it’s a good thing if it helps you get the words down, but it simply can’t stay that way. You might not even see these repeated words and phrases because they seem so comfortable to you, but they’ll drive your readers insane.
The revision stage is the perfect place to weed out those repetitions and replace them with better and more varied descriptions. A good way to do this is to take advantage of Word’s ‘Reading Highlight’ option under the ‘Find’ feature. It really helps drive the point home when you see a swarm of highlighted words on the page. If you’re not sure what your crutch words are but know they’re there (and they almost always are), enlist the help of a crit partner to help you identify them. They also have the pesky habit of changing as your writing evolves. As soon as you beat a couple of them into submission, new ones pop up, so just because you’re on novel number six doesn’t mean you’re free of these irritating little gremlins.
To other authors, what are your crutch words? Have you found a way to keep them from creeping in, or do you just resign yourself to whacking them during the revision stage?
Now if I could only get my characters to stop striding everywhere they go… *eyeroll*
Photo credit: Tony Crider
Forensics 101: Strontium—You Are What You Eat
/
In past Forensics 101 posts, we’ve discussed skeletal identification through adult or pre-pubescent aging, sex and race. But what if only partial remains are found, perhaps only a few bones? Is there a way to start the identification process when the skull or pelvis is missing and all you have to work with is a single femur? The bones themselves can still share information with investigators, and one of crucial piece of evidence is the analysis of strontium content in the bone.
Elemental strontium is found in the soil, water supplies and bedrock of our planet. Due to an extremely long half-life, strontium isotope levels remain constant in the environment for extended periods of time. Plants that grow in strontium-rich soils naturally incorporate the element into their cellular structure. Herbivores in turn consume the plants, absorbing the strontium. Similar to calcium, strontium becomes part of the mineral structure of bone.
The key to strontium analysis is its four stable isotopes—strontium-84, -86, -87 and -88. Geographic distribution differences exist for all four isotopes, and, as a result, different geographic areas of the world have characteristic ratios between isotopes and will transfer those identical ratios to local plants. Small sections of bone are analyzed through mass spectrometry to reveal their strontium profile. Match the strontium ratio of recovered remains to a geographic location, and you’ve learned an important detail about your victim.
But strontium analysis can be even more precise. As children grow and bones lengthen, the strontium they consume becomes a part of their skeletal structure. But, like calcium, the strontium content in bone turns over approximately every six years throughout life. As new strontium is integrated into bone, it leaves a geographic fingerprint that lasts for the next six years of life. Conversely, strontium is incorporated permanently into tooth enamel during dental development in children, leaving a lifelong indictor in adult teeth as to where the individual spent his or her childhood years.
While not leading directly to a definitive identification, information about where a victim grew up or lived during the past six years could be crucial in providing investigators with a starting point for missing persons’ searches. DNA would be the next logical step in victim identification, and I’ll discuss that in the next Forensics 101 post.
Photo credit: Buddy8d
A Computer is a Writer’s Best Friend
/
This past week, what many writers fear happened to me—my four year-old XPS laptop died. Long time readers of the blog will remember last Janaury when I waxed nostalgic after my keyboard died. I should have known then that the end was near, but I think I was in denial.
By the time the display finally decided to give up the ghost, I was living on borrowed time. The second battery was barely functioning, the webcam had died, I was on both the second motherboard and keyboard, and to say that my 300GB drive was overflowing would be an understatment.
I bought my XPS when Ann and I had been writing together for only a year and were still just writing for fun. At the time, the idea of writing professionally hadn’t even entered our heads. But just over a year later, we’d set our sights on Go big or go home, and were focusing on a new manuscript and starting the querying process when it was complete.
And here we are, three years later, with the first book out next May, our editor asking for the second book by the end of this year, a new proposal finished, and we’re already thinking about the next project and future possibilities. And, to do that, I need my main work tool—a new (working!) laptop.
Above is a picture of my new best friend as I’m neck deep in edits for A Flame in the Wind of Death, the sequel to Dead, Without a Stone to Tell It. My old, trusty laptop served us well as we wrote over a million words while we learned our craft. Now I’m looking forward to the next million words with this one!
Forensic Case Files: The Tollund Man – A Bog Body
/
In 1950, in a bog near the small town of Tollund, Denmark, two brothers were cutting peat to use for fuel when they stumbled upon a corpse so well preserved, they were sure it was a recent murder victim. The police were called in and they recovered the body from under two meters of peat. Curled into the fetal position, the victim was naked except for a cap tied under his chin, a belt around his waist and a noose around his neck. Confused by the state of the remains, the police called in an archeologist who determined that the remains were not recent. In fact, the burial was over two thousand years old and likely that of a sacrificial victim.
The bog environment was responsible for this extraordinary preservation. Peat is composed of partially decayed plant life, usually Sphagnum moss, with smaller amounts of other vegetation. Because the wetland ecosystem is acidic and lacking both nutrients and oxygen, any decay process—plant or animal—is significantly slowed. The other crucial factor in this environment is the presence of tannins. Tannins naturally occur in plants, but only become active once the plant dies and its tissues break down. Tannins have been used for making leather by tanning—the process of treating animal skins to halt decay and make them more durable—since 7000 B.C.
Well-preserved remains found in peat bogs are called ‘bog bodies’ and have been discovered in many countries across Northern Europe. The conditions in the bog not only slow normal putrefaction and decomposition, but the chemicals in the peat tan the skin, inhibiting decay and resulting in remarkable preservation.
When scientists examined the body of the Tollund Man, they found detailed evidence of early Iron-age life. Radiocarbon dating determined that the man died between 375-210 B.C. at approximately 40 years of age. The cause of death was clear—he was hung by the braided animal hide rope around his neck, resulting in abrasions on the side of his neck and under his chin, and a distended tongue. His internal organs were still intact, and scientists could even determine that his final meal consisted of a porridge made from local wild and cultivated seeds and vegetables. Stubble on his face suggested that his final shave was likely the day before his death.
The remains of the Tollund Man are on display in the Silkeborg Museum in Denmark. Unfortunately, due to preservation techniques of the day, only the head was preserved properly and the rest of the body’s soft tissue was lost outside of the protective environment of the bog. In 1987, a replica of the body was created based on Tollund Man’s skeletal remains and is displayed with the preserved head and all of his other artifacts.
From a forensics standpoint, I’m always amazed at the preservation of these bodies and how they shine a light on what life was like centuries or millennia ago. In many ways, when we are so distant from this way of life—a time when the oldest known European book wouldn’t be written for another 1,000 years—these remarkable remains continue to be our best window into past lives.
Photo credits: Wiki Commons
Guest Post: CONJURE's Cover Reveal!
/Surprise, readers! Yes, I'm blogging a day early this week, but it's for a very special reason. It's a big day today for Seymour Agency sister Lea Nolan as she releases the gorgeous new cover for her debut novel CONJURE, book one of her MG/YA crossover 'Hoodoo Apprentice' series. Many of her fellow authors wanted to get in on the fun with her, so we're also hosting her cover on our blogs.
So what's CONJURE all about?
Be careful what you search for…
Emma Guthrie expects this summer to be like any other in the South Carolina Lowcountry--hot and steamy with plenty of beach time alongside her best friend and secret crush, Cooper Beaumont, and Emma’s ever-present twin brother, Jack. But then a mysterious eighteenth-century message in a bottle surfaces, revealing a hidden pirate bounty. Lured by the adventure, the trio discovers the treasure and unwittingly unleashes an ancient Gullah curse that attacks Jack with the wicked flesh-eating Creep and promises to steal Cooper’s soul on his approaching sixteenth birthday.
When a strange girl appears, bent on revenge; demon dogs become a threat; and Jack turns into a walking skeleton; Emma has no choice but to learn hoodoo magic to undo the hex, all before summer—and her friends--are lost forever.
In celebration of this momentous moment, Lea is hosting a rafflecopter giveway so sign up for your chance to win a digital ARC of CONJURE!
And now, without further adoo, here is the brand new cover for Lea Nolan's CONJURE:
*drumroll*
So what do you think, guys? Isn't that a gorgeous cover? I love the mood it sets and it certainly makes me want to dive into it!
For those of you who want more of Lea, you can find her in various places around web:
CONJURE on Goodreads: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13425130-conjure
Lea's website: http://www.leanolan.com/
Lea on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Lea_Nolan
Keeping all the Balls in the Air
/
I went back to work a few weeks ago after six months off. I’d been comfortable in my old job after 20 years and performing its required tasks was no big deal. But I had some concerns about starting a new job with a new research focus and protocols to learn while still keeping my writing going and managing my family and household. How was I going to keep all the balls in the air?
In the end, that worry wasn’t warranted because it was amazing how fast things fell back into place and old habits took root again. So how do I manage to maintain a regular writing schedule when I’m working 40 hours a week in the lab?
- Have a set schedule: I’m a creature of habit and I find a regular schedule is not only comforting but makes my life easier.
- Make writing a priority: The last few weeks have been a little upheaved because Ann and I were finishing up a thriller proposal, but I’m working hard at trying to set aside a good two hour block every week night to work on my writing, whether it’s blogging, editing a chapter or writing fresh material. I also squeeze in time before work and during my lunch break for things like email and my regular blog reading. Then on the week-ends I take advantage of those longer blocks of time to really get in the zone and drive my word count up.
- Give up your social life: It drives my poor husband nuts, but I’m a homebody, so this one wasn’t a real hardship. Especially now that I’m back in the lab and it feels like I’m constantly surrounded by people, I don’t mind coming home and just hanging out with my family. I often work with at least one of my daughters on their laptop nearby, so it’s never an entirely solitary endeavour.
- Kiss TV goodbye: It’s fun and it’s entertaining, but it’s also a time suck. So I’m trying not to pick up any new TV shows and I’m trying to only use any time watching TV as my downtime after a long day.
- Plan obsessively: This one has always come naturally for me, and I think it’s part of my ‘set schedule’ habit, but I always plan things out ahead of time. For instance, I write up the week’s menus while I’m making my shopping list. I shop only once a week and make sure I buy everything I need then to eliminate repeated shopping trips.
- Give yourself a break on the dusting: I’d love it if my house was cleaned weekly, but that’s simply not going to happen. So I do my best to try to keep things relatively organized, but I feel free to ignore a little dust. Unless someone is coming over, then you’ll see me cleaning!
- Remember you need downtime: Don’t forget that you need time to unwind and recharge. And if the best you can do is an hour at the end of the day, then that’s better than working until nearly midnight and then starting all over again at 6 a.m. the next day.
For those of you who also work full time and write, how do you manage to keep all of your balls in the air?
Last week I was tagged by both Marisa Cleveland and Kate Serine for the ‘look’ meme. You’re supposed to search your WIP for the first instance of the word ‘look’ and paste the surrounding material into your blog. So, Marisa and Kate, here you go!
From Chapter One of A Flame in the Wind of Death:
Matt frowned as a muffled ring came from the suit jacket draped over the back of his chair. “Sorry, I need to see who it is.” He reached into his jacket pocket to pull out his phone.
Leigh’s senses instantly went on alert when he suddenly froze. “What?”
“I think I have to take this.”
Unease filled her at the edge in his voice. “Is it one of your students?”
He looked up from the illuminated screen. “No, it’s the Massachusetts State Police.”
“For you?” The words burst out, easily cutting through the buzz of conversation around them. Leigh purposely lowered her voice when several heads turned in their direction. “For you?” she repeated in a stage whisper.
“Apparently. Trust me; I’m as baffled as you.” He answered the call. “Lowell.”
Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons
0.7%
