Abstract

Microbial forensics is a feld that uses scientifc methods to analyze the evidence of bioterrorism, bio crimes, hoaxes, or the unintentional release of a biological agent or microbial toxin to determine who is to blame. It is now possible to characterize microorganisms for various human forensic applications, including human identifcation, body fluid characterization, postmortem interval estimation, and bio crimes involving the tracking of infectious agents. Big applause to technological advancements, remarkably massively parallel sequencing and bioinformatics. The oral microbiome contains microbiota markers that vary between individuals, emphasizing the possibility that it is highly individualized and perhaps even particular to each person. As a result, the oral microbial evidence found at crime scenes may lead to new information. This comprehensive review will discuss the state of the art of using the oral microbiome as a signature to conclude in the forensics sector.

• 1.   Zaura E, Keijser BJ, Huse SM, Crielaard W. Defining the healthy
• 2.   Curtis MA, Zenobia C, Darveau RP. The relationship of the oral microbiotia to periodontal health and disease. Cell Host Microbe. 2011; 10:302–306.
• 3.   Zheng W, Tsompana M, Ruscitto A, Sharma A, Genco R, Sun Y, Buck MJ. An accurate and efficient experimental approach for characterization of the complex oral microbiota. Microbiome. 2015. 3:48.
• 4.   Beck JD, Offenbacher S. Systemic Effects of Periodontitis: Epidemiology of Periodontal Disease and Cardiovascular Disease. J. Periodontol. 2005; 76:2089–2100.
• 5.   Yamashita Y, Takeshita T. The oral microbiome and human health. J. Oral. Sci. 2017.59:201–206.
• 6.   Sharma N, Bhatia S, Singh Sodhi A, Batra N. Oral microbiome and health. AIMS Microbiol 2018. 4:42–66.
• 7.   Belstrøm D. The salivary microbiota in health and disease. J. Oral. Microbiol. 2020; 12:1723975.
• 8.   Leake SL, Pagni M, Falquet L, Taroni F, Greub G. The salivary microbiome for differentiating individuals: Proof of principle. Microbes Infect. 2016; 18:399–405.
• 9.   Gao L, Xu T, Huang G, Jiang S, Gu Y, Chen F, et al. Oral microbiomes: More and more importance in oral cavity and whole body. Protein Cell 2018;9:488-500.
• 10.   Takeshita T, Matsuo K, Furuta M, Shibata Y, Fukami K, Shimazaki Y, Akifusa S, Han DH, Kim HD, Yokoyama T, Ninomiya T, Kiyohara Y, Yamashita Y. Distinct composition of the oral indigenous microbiota in South Korean and Japanese adults.Sci Rep. 2014 Nov 11;4:6990.
• 11.   Lane N. The unseen world: Reflections on Leeuwenhoek (1677) 'concerning little animals'. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2015;370.
• 12.   Patil S, Rao RS, Amrutha N, Sanketh DS. Oral microbial flora in healthWorld J Dent2013;4:262-6.
• 13.   Moon HJ. Probing the diversity of healthy oral microbiome with bioinformatics approaches. BMB Rep 2016;49:662-70.
• 14.   Mark Welch JL, Rossetti BJ, Rieken CW, Dewhirst FE, Borisy GG. Biogeography of a human oral microbiome at the micron scale. Proc NatlAcad Sci U S A 2016.113:E791-800.
• 15.   Koenig JE, Spor A, Scalfone N, Fricker AD, Stombaugh J, Knight R, et al. Succession of microbial consortia in the developing infant gut microbiome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011; 108:4578–85.
• 16.   Gibbons SM, Schwartz T, Fouquier J, Mitchell M, Sangwan N, Gilbert JA, et al. Ecological succession and viability of human-associated microbiota on restroom surfaces. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015;81:765–73.
• 17.   Gilbert JA. Our unique microbial identity. Genome Biol. 2015 May 14;16(1):97.
• 18.   Javan GT, Finley SJ, Abidin Z, and Mulle JG. The thanatomicrobiome: a missing piece of the microbial puzzle of death. Front. Microbiol 2016. 7:225.
• 19.   Burcham ZM, PechalJL, Schmidt CJ, Bose JL, RoschJW, BenbowME, et al. Bacterial community succession, transmigration, and differential gene transcription in a controlled vertebrate decomposition model. Front. Microbiol 2019. 10:745.
• 20.   Javan, G. T., Finley, S. J., Tuomisto, S., Hall, A., Benbow, M. E., and Mills,D. (2019). An interdi[osciplinary review of the thanatomicrobiome in humandecomposition. Forensic Sci. Med. Pathol. 15, 75–83.
• 21.   Adserias-Garriga J, Hernández M, Quijada NM, Rodríguez Lázaro D,Steadman D, and Garcia-Gil J. Daily thanatomicrobiome changesin soil as an approach of postmortem interval estimation: an ecologicalperspective. Forensic Sci. Int. 2017a. 278, 388–395.
• 22.   Adserias-Garriga J, Quijada NM, Hernandez M, Rodríguez Lázaro D,Steadman D, and Garcia-Gil LJ. Dynamics of the oral microbiotaas a tool to estimate time since death. Mol. Oral Microbiol. 2017b. 32, 511–516.
• 23.   Metcalf JL, Xu ZZ, Weiss S, LaxS, Van Treuren W, Hyde ER, et al. Microbial community assembly and metabolic function duringmammalian corpse decomposition. Science 2016. 351, 158–162.
• 24.   HydeER, Haarmann DP, PetrosinoJF, Lynne AM, and Bucheli SR. Initial insights into bacterial succession during human decomposition.Int. J. Legal Med. 2015. 129, 661–671.
• 25.   Hyde ER, Haarmann DP, Lynne AM, Bucheli SR, and PetrosinoJF. The living dead: bacterial community structure of a cadaver at theonset and end of the bloat stage of decomposition. PLoS One 2013.
• 26.   Johnson HR, TrinidadDD, Guzman S, Khan Z, Parziale JV, DeBruynJM, et al. A machine learning approach for using the postmortemskin microbiome to estimate the postmortem interval. PLoS One 2016.11:e0167370.
• 27.   PechalJL, SchmidtCJ, Jordan HR, and Benbow ME. A large-scale survey of the postmortem human microbiome, and its potential to provideinsight into the living health condition. Sci. Rep.2018. 8:5724.
• 28.   Zhang Y, Pechal JL, Schmidt CJ, JordanHR, Wang WW, BenbowME, et al. Machine learning performance in a microbial molecularautopsy context: a cross-sectional postmortem human population study. PLoSOne. 2019.14:e0213829.
• 29.   Schmedes SE, Sajantila A, and Budowle B. Expansion of microbial forensics. J. Clin. Microbiol 2016. 54, 1964–1974.
• 30.   KennedyDM, StantonJA, GarciaJA, Mason C, Rand CJ, KieserJA, et al. Microbial analysis of bite marks by sequence comparison of streptococcal DNA. PLoS One 2012.7:e51757.
• 31.   Human Microbiome, and Project Consortium. Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome. Nature 2012. 486, 207– 214.
• 32.   Hanssen EN, Liland KH, Gill P, and Snipen L. Optimizing body fluid recognition from microbial taxonomic profiles. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet 2018. 37, 13– 20.
• 33.   Quaak FCA, van DuijnT, HoogenboomJ, Kloosterman AD, and KuiperI. Human-associated microbial populations as evidence in forensic casework. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet 2018. 36, 176–185.
• 34.   Schmedes SE, Woerner AE, NovroskiNMM, WendtFR, King JL, Stephens KM, et al. Targeted sequencing of clade-specific markers from skin microbiomes for forensic human identification. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet 2018. 32, 50– 61.
• 35.   WoernerAE, Novroski NMM, Wendt FR, AmbersA, WileyR, SchmedesSE, et al. Forensic human identification with targeted microbiome markers using nearest neighbor classification. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet 2019. 38, 130– 139

Data Sharing Statement

Funding