Comprehensive characterization of commercially available canine training aids

Effective and reliable training aids for victim recovery canine teams is essential for law enforcement and investigative purposes. Without adequate training aids, the rate of recovery for sub surface or surface human remains deposition using canine teams may be adversely affected and result in confusing information. The composition of three commercially available canine training aids that purportedly generate volatile components responsible for the odor of human decomposition is relatively simple and not closely related to those compounds experimentally determined to be present at the site of surface or sub-surface human remains. In this study, these different commercial formulations were chemically characterized using six different sampling approaches, including two applications of direct liquid injection, solid-phase microextraction (SPME), purge and trap, ambient preconcentration/thermal desorption, and cryogenic preconcentration/thermal desorption. Direct liquid injections resulted in the fewest number of detected compounds, while a cryogen based thermal desorption method detected the greatest number of compounds in each formulation. Based solely upon the direct liquid injection analysis, Pseudo™ Scent I was composed of approximately 29±4% and 71±5% of 2-pyrrolidinone and 4-aminobutanoic acid, respectively. This same analysis showed that Pseudo™ Scent II was composed of approximately 11±1, 11±1, 24±5, and 54±7% of putrescine, cadaverine, 2-pyrrolidinone, and 4-aminobutanoic acid, respectively. Headspace analysis was conducted to more closely simulate the process whereby a canine's nose would capture a volatiles profile. More compounds were detected using the headspace sampling method; however, the vast majority was not consistent with current data on human decomposition. Additionally, the three formulations were tested in outdoor and indoor scenarios by a double-blinded canine team, using a certified and specifically trained victim recovery canine with multiple confirmed recoveries, to determine if the formulations would be recognized by that canine as being related to human decomposition. The canine used in this study did not provide a positive response to any of the formulations tested in either test scenario. The implications for locating residual human decomposition odor in the absence of recoverable material are discussed in light of these data.