Hello, and welcome to the IUPUI Center for Translating Research Into Practice August, scholar of the Month Conversation with doctor John G Goodpasor. My name is Steve Veg. I'm the Associate Director of the Center. My pleasure to welcome you here. The Center for Translating Research Into Practice seeks to identify, celebrate, and promote research that is translational or that is interdisciplinary. That generates or uses generated knowledge to solve complex problems in our community. We're grateful for our beginnings, our humble beginnings from doctor Sandra Patrona, Emeritus Professor of communications, who came to campus some years back and recognized how much translational research happens here at I UPI. Our current director is Emeritus Chancellor, Charles AR Avance, who helps lead us in the continued efforts to make sure that this sort of research is available across our campus and in our community. We're delighted to have you here with us today, and we are welcoming doctor John Goodpasor, who will talk to us pretty soon, but I want to give us some beginnings here and remind us about Zoom etiquette. Everybody's familiar with Zoom, but just as a reminder, please be sure to keep your microphones muted, and you can leave your videos off at the beginning. So that we have plenty of opportunity to hear our initial comments from doctor Good Pastor. We encourage you to type questions and comments into the chat, and there'll be time for conversation at the end of his initial presentation. We are recording the presentation for future reference, and you will receive a post evaluation. We'd love to hear your comments and thoughts as we plan for these amazing monthly conversations with our scholars. The opportunity now is available for you to get credit. If you're interested in getting some continuing education units. All you have to do is search for Expand at I Ue website and you can sign up and get credit as you attend these monthly sessions. We hope that you'll take advantage of that and tell your friends about this opportunity. You can always follow us at the center about what's going on in the area of translational research. You can find us on Twitter, Facebook, Well U Picket. We also have a YouTube channel where you can find video interviews and information about our translational scholars. Like to make sure that you know information is available in lots of other ways, including the research articles. If you go, for example, to our trip website and go to the featured scholars. If you click today on John Goodpasor, our speaker, you'll be able to see some more information about him and see some of his works that are available on something called Scholar Works, where you're able to see many of his publications free and easy for you to read. Or you can go directly to the Scholar works page and see more information about his work. Is an amazing resource available to anyone in the community so that you can access the work of our scholars and be able to understand and ask questions and get involved with us as we work together to solve complex problems in our community. So coming up next month, we are going to have our conversation of the month with scholar Sylvia Begati, and she'll be talking about a community engaged and strength based approach to fostering well being in Latinx communities. And that schedule for September 24, you can always check out the schedule of other events coming up on our website. Today, we are delighted to have with us, doctor John Goodpasor, who's an associate professor in the Department of Chemistry and the director of the forensic and Investigative Sciences Program here at IUPUI. He teaches about alcohol, drugs, and trace evidence and conducts research on ignitable liquids, controlled substances, and explosives. And we're delighted to have him with us here today so that we can learn more about his work and have a conversation with him to see what we might learn and add about this work. So please help me give a warm IEPI, whoser welcome to doctor John Goodpasor. Well, thank you very much. I'm going to go ahead and share my screen and we can go through some slides talking about our research. Does that look okay to everybody hopefully? Excellent. Well, we're going to talk about chemical analysis. I'm an analytical chemist, and so analytical chemists are concerned with making very careful and exact measurements of various systems. We're going to talk about chemical analysis as a tool for both arson and explosives investigations and the efforts that have been going on in my group in that area. Let's start with a really broad definition. What is forensic science? I'm a forensic scientist. The broadest definition of that is that the forensic science is an application of science to the processes of law. I'm a chemist by training, but I'm applying chemistry to things that are legally relevant like a criminal investigation. Therefore, I'm practicing forensic chemistry. You can have any other type of science that you can think of. If it's applied to something that's legally relevant, it's a process of law, then that can be a forensic science. Obviously chemistry, biology, physics, a whole assortment, psychology. These are all considered forensic sciences. Now, criminalistics is a little more specific. Criminalistics is also the umbrella term for what I do, and that is distinguished by the analysis of physical evidence. Actual matter or material that you gather from a crime scene, a suspect or a victim, and that can be all sort of different things. I've got a list here of possible within the greater field of criminalistics. Trace evidence is really where our work falls. Typically or traditionally, Arsonin and explosives investigations are a form of trace evidence, but that also includes things like hair, fibers, glass, paint, you name it, can all be analyzed as trace evidence. Here's one of my favorite quotes. It's about the power of trace evidence. It's attributed to Paul Kirk, who was a very famous criminalist in the 20th century. I won't read it word for word, but I do want to point out a couple of things. One is that The principles of trace evidence are such that no matter what, whatever environment you are in, you will tend to deposit trace evidence in that environment and pick up trace evidence in that environment. That's called the L card Exchange principle. These types of trace materials can be thought of as mute witnesses. They are simply materials that have no agenda. They do not have flaws of memory. They don't have any kind of bias, and it's really up to scientists like trace evidence scientists to look at that evidence and discern its meaning. And so that's where chemical analysis comes in, is that the analysis of physical evidence in the form of trace evidence can tell you about circumstantial links within a criminal investigation. And those links are primarily forged between the suspect the victim and the crime scene. When you think about forensic chemists, their job function falls into one of two different areas. The first is just identification, which is you're given an unknown and using the tools of chemistry, identify what that material is. Some examples are listed here. For example, given a blood sample, can you identify ethanol or ethyl alcohol present in that sample and at what level? Is it above or below 0.08, for example. This white powder substance that you see in the slide. That could be heroin or methamphetamine or cocaine or methcathenone, or any number of different organic compounds that are controlled substances. It's up to a chemist to take it from a white powder to then analyze it and then deduce and confirm its identity. Explosives falls within this. You have to identify the presence of an explosive in an explosive device either before or after it is detonated. Inatquid, same thing, you go into a firecen, and you have to try to identify whether or not an gnat liquid might be there because that would be a strong indicator of arson. Then the other job function is comparing. This is usually where you have two samples. One sample has a known origin, like it's known to have come from a suspect or a victim or a crime scene, and then you have a question sample or an unknown. And you then carry out a series of tests, compare the characteristics of the question sample, the Q, then the known sample, the k. As you get to the end of those tests, you can make a determination as whether those two samples could have had a common origin. For example, fibers from a victim's shirt may have been found on the suspect during a violent altercation. You compare those fibers taken from the suspect, fibers from the victim, look at the characteristics and try to determine if they are the same. Because if they are the same, that means there's some chance they could have come from the same place. All right. Now we're into the research part of this talk. I'm going to talk about three different sub projects. The first, I'm calling beating the bugs because this project was about preserving fire debris evidence. In a fire, if a gnetic liquid is used, it is relatively common for residues of that getic liquid to remain. No fire is 100% efficient. The residual, if you're using gasoline to start a fire, the residual fuel or residual gasoline is still there and you can try to identify it. What happens, however, is if you are looking at a fire like this, in this picture where you've got a fire on top of a grassy soil type of matrix, There are certain species of microbes that live in soil that also happen to have the ability to actually consume gasoline and other petroleum products. They will actively eat the same chemical compounds that are in these fuels and use them to turn into energy and to reproduce and so on. When I first learned about this, I was surprised. I didn't think that bacteria would want to have anything to do with things like gasoline, but there are certain species. This photograph actually shows you a microscopic image of the species of bacteria that we're dealing with it's called pseudomonas. So it's a pretty large genus of microbes, but it has this ability to metabolize things that are not natural, things like distilled fuels and so on. Normally, in a fire scene, you have a pretty strict list of things to do. You're looking for both the cause of the fire and its origin. You want to try to identify where the fire started. That's the origin. You then will excavate or go below the surface level and look for residual fuel. This picture shows you these dark stains in the carpet padding underneath this carpeting, and those are from the fuel that was poured there. Somebody poured a liquid that seep through the carpet and into the carpet padding and burn. But even though it burned and then the fire was extinguished, you still see these residues. So carpet padding, for example, a very common type of material in fire investigations. You collect that. You then can collect comparison samples if they're available, and then analyze those and try to identify any kind of ignitable liquid. In cases where there's lots of residue, you would get a result like this. What I'm showing you here and I'm going to show you several of these, this is called a chromatogram. The y axis is called the total ion chromatogram or total ion current, and that's the response of an instrument called a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer or GCMS. This is the response of that instrument versus time. The way the instrument works is that it'll take very complicated mixtures. You inject those onto a long thin column and those compounds will each adopt a velocity that's not exactly unique to them, but very characteristic of that compound. So what happens is that things that adopt very fast velocity will come out quickly, at relatively low retention times. Things that are very slow as they move through the common, the column will come out very late at longer retention times. You can see that each one of these spikes here represents a different chemical compound. Gasoline contains somewhere on the order of 300 different chemical compounds. I've only identified in this figure ten different compounds, those are listed here on the left. But with chromatography and Mspatrometry, this enables you to really tease apart these mixtures and identify exactly what is present there. Chromatography like this is used, not only in initaquid analysis, but also in explosives analysis. What is this problem then with the bugs? I talked about pseudomonas and that they're found in soil, and that the pseudomonas can actively start to metabolize or consume ignitable liquids. The speed with which this happens is relatively rapid. We're talking on the order of days that this will happen. In the real world, it is not uncommon at all to collect fire evidence and then have it sit for a while. It goes to the laboratory it sits. During that time, if you have soil in your evidence or any de graining wood matter and that kind of thing, these bacteria will start to kick into gear and we'll start consuming the mat of a liquid. If you don't do anything about it, if you let things go unchecked, then you can actually see in some cases total elimination of the gnatib liquid. So the evidence essentially has gone bad. It's gone to the point where there's nothing left and you can't identify it. That would lead to a false negative. You'd analyze the evidence, you'd see nothing. If you didn't know that microbial action was going on, then you would say that there's no gati liquid present, but in fact, there was, it just got consumed in the time it took from collection to actual analysis. I can point this out to you, on the left hand side are chromatograms of gasoline, just like the one that I showed you a couple of slides ago. This is what happens when gasoline evaporates. This is normal during a fire. Fires of course are hot, and therefore things that have low boiling points will evaporate more readily than things that have high boiling points. If you look at these chromatograms, as you move from A, C to D, you can see that there's a shift in all the peak. The peaks seem to be shifting more and more to the right. That basically means that all the boiling points are shifting. All the light or low booling point compounds are being evaporated, the heavier ones are sticking around, and so you end up with a chromatogram still, but it's has been shifted. This is important to understand this process, but it's not a deal breaker. You can still identify gasoline in a number of other liquids, even if they've been evaporated, sometimes even highly evaporated. On the right hand side, however, is what microbes do. The microbial action as you move from A B C to D or E to H. In that case, there's this whole cell loss. You'll notice that by the time you get to bottom chromatogram, which had been sitting for 22 days, which again is not far fetched in terms of how long evidence sits around before it gets analyzed, you see very little of the original gasoline. The microbes have done their damage. The solution to this was preventing degradation, and we did that by using an antimicrobial agent. The same thing they would that you would use to sterilize things in laboratories, or it's also used as if you've ever seen there's certain brands of plastic that are inherently antimicrobial. Um, this molecule called triclosan, is that same molecules get incorporated too plastics. For us, it was ideal. It was non volatile, meaning it wouldn't interfere with all the fuel vapors, so it doesn't show up when you actually do the analysis, even if you put that on there. It's not going to crow the can or somehow breach the container. Very potent. If you look at sterile versus non sterile, the amount of triclosan that was required in order to kill off all these bacteria in a live culture, was relatively minimal, and it was long lasting. Lasted 60 days in our testing. And also relatively inexpensive. The idea in terms of this application is that you would actually apply a solution of triclosan onto soil when you collect it. So you immediately put this chemical sterilizing agent on there that preserves the evidence, and so even 60 days later, you can go back and analyze it and there's no interfering, no interferences with the actual analysis. This was an outcome that we devised from a National Institute of Justice grant. This got published, and we had a patent application that also resulted as a outcome of this particular project. It was fun too, because this is bringing in one of our first partners is that we had to do these tests on realistic samples. If you're testing fire degree, that means you need to burn something and then collect that material. I just have a whole collage of pictures here. When we went out with the Indianapolis Fire Department, and we built multiple of cocktails. You can see these wine bottles and beer bottles on the ground. A multi of cocktails, it is a breakable bottle filled with liquid, and then it's got a wick on top. You can see these cloths next to it. Then you start a fire by breaking the bottle with a wick. In this case, we put down bricks, and then the bottle would break cause a large fire, and you can see that the soil here has been exposed. We have soil that's been exposed. We then gather after the malt of cocktail burn its way out. Gather that up and bring that in for testing, and we did a controlled study where we either preserved it or we didn't. And we saw a huge difference between preserve samples and those that were not preserved. If you're wondering what this picture is of the firefighter rolling around, you might see it by his ankle, but he actually caught on fire. He didn't know it at first until people started yelling to him that he was on fire. He started to do the stop dropping roll. We put him out. He wasn't hurt injured at all. The firefighters thought this was hilarious at the time. But we had them put on their full turnout gear and try to do this in as safe way as possible. This is students of various years and specialties gathering the soil. All of this was gathered up, packaged into these paint cans, you can see here, the lower right, and the upper right, and then transported to our laboratory. Part two. Go to the dogs, meaning assessing explosive detecting canines. The use of canines to find explosives has been a pretty well established practice for quite a long time. This dates back to the 19, 70s and 80s, I believe. You can see here on the picture on the left. This is a ATF K 19, where you've got the handler who's presenting these gallon paint cans to the dog, which will then walk up sniff into the open paint can, and then if there is explosive there, it alerts by sitting down. Here on the right, the crime lab or the crime laboratory, will sit and wait and then get a reward. And the ATF system, they get food every time the alert, and other systems they get a special tennis ball or toy, something that motivates them. And so we've been looking at the use of dogs for detection of explosives for quite some time because it's something that I did prior to coming to IEP Y was with the TF laboratory. So one of my jobs there was certifying explosives in acting canines. I want to show you a canine inaction. This is not an ATF dog. This is a dog from the UK Metropolitan Police. What you're going to see, there's no sound. It's just the video showing the dog being released and running down, say 50 yards to the end of a range and there's a series of posts number one through six. The dog has to find the post that has an explosive. In this case, the explosive is a pretty dangerous one. It's called triaton tri peroxide. It's a high explosive, but it's very sensitive to shock. Heat and friction. This was done off leave, you don't leave the dog right up to something, you let the dog run and then it'll do it sensing. Let's give you an example though of how quickly a dog can find something that's explosive. You see that and even does a quick double back because it's moving so fast. But the smell of explosives to a well trained dog are really obvious, and they can be trained to be ridiculously sensitive, very selective. They can pick out the odor or explosive u. There's a lot of other stuff going on. As you can see here in this video clip, they can do it really quickly and without a to direct. They can be trained in a number of different ways. This is showing you that again. 100 grams is about two cups of explosives to put that in perspective. We're not talking about a ton of material. Now here's some more chromatograms. This time we're look at chromatograms from explosives. The top chromatogram is TNT, a very well known explosive the structure is shown right here. And this is a chromatogram of the head space above TT. We're not actually analyzing the explosive. We're just analyzing the air that is collected above the explosive. In this case, you can see this huge peak here. This is for 24 dinitroti. This is not TNT. The TNT peak is this little t g way over here. The concentration of TNT in that space is actually relatively low. The concentration of DNT, which is an impurity in normal TNT manufacture is very high because it's more volatile. If you look at the bottom chromagram, this is a compound or a material called nest, which is a non explosive training aid. All they do is they take silica finely divided silica and coat it with a layer of TNT. Actual percentage by mass, TNT is really low, 8%. Therefore, this won't blow up. This is considered to be safe. But it shows you a very similar pattern. Here's the TNT, here's the DNT peak d to that. So Because of that, and this is actually echoing what I just said. Because of that, people have had this thought that's been around a while. Well, why not devise materials that either have explosives and won't blow up, so something that's diluted or has no explosive at all and just has select chemical compounds on it that we know smelled like explosives. Facsimile of an explosive odor. Those are called pedopive, or pseudo sense. They're commercially available. They've been marketed for use for all of KITs. But a lot of people have some issues there because there's pros and cons for using them. The pros are pretty straightforward that you can have simulant that shows you the odor, but doesn't have anything in it. It's actually an explosive. That means that they're safe, they are not hazardous unless you eat them, and there's really no special requirements for storage or shipping. The cons though, is that is typically not known what the chemical composition is. They don't tell you, they sell you this material on the proprietary material, and they haven't been exhaustively tested. Until we came in. What happened with us is that we were asked by the Department of Defense to evaluate pseudo explosives and see to what extent they are effective. Can you use a pseudo explosive to train a dog and then have that dog find real explosives? Or if you have dogs that are trained on real explosives, and they find pseudo explosives. I pedo explosives are actually doing what they say they're doing by mimicking these odors, then this should be true. This cross activity should happen. We went to a fair amount of trouble and time to do this. We had to train up dogs from scratch. We enlisted 24 different canine teams and then trained them in three groups. One group was trained on genuine explosives, one pseudoploss from a certain brand, and then the third group was a different brand of pseudo explosives. We had these three groups, took a while to get them all trained up and accurately finding what they were trained to find. Then we did a series of tests where we had them find what they were trained to find. The real explosive dogs go along and try to find C four, composition of C four, smokeless powder or TNT, and they would do very well. These things in bold show the overall accuracy with which the dogs were able to operate. But then when you gave them blind samples of pseudo explosives, for the most part, they ignored them. The overall accuracy was really poor for many of these pseudo explosive compounds. If you take a look at some of these other columns here, you can see the same phenomena happened where if you have a dog that's trained on a certain brand, a pseudo explosives, the response rates tend to be very high, but they're very low when you actually find real explosives. There's no correlation between training a dog on a pseudo explosive and it actually finding the real thing. Essentially, it comes down to the canines we'll find, what you train them to find. If you train them on pedo explosives, then that's the find. But we don't care about psdoploss in the real world, we care about the actual dangerous explosives. This blue hole in the theory about using pseudose. Then last is talking about improvised explosive devices. In this case, I'm showing you a couple of pictures. One, this is an apparatus that we designed and together with the Indiana State Police bomb squad put together to actually gather residues of explosives. These metal plates that are suspended along all the different axes. We would suspend a pipe bomb in the middle of this, detonate it and then gather the residues that were present on what are called witness materials. In a real bombing, witness materials can be cars, street signs, any kind of surface that survives a blast, but is there to actually collect residue, and you can actually analyze that residue and determine what kind of explosives there. We've also done several studies using pipe bombs and gathering the fragments that remain because there's clues there as well. Not only is the residue on these materials, but the size and velocity of these fragments can vary significantly depending on what explosive is used and what type of container is used. I've got a clip here. This is us out with the bomb squad doing pip explosions, but we used a high speed video camera to record the explosion. This is being recorded at 20,000 frames per second. That's fast enough. You can actually catch the explosion happening in slow mo, ultra slow motion. And what you're going to see here is the beginnings of a explosion, the full destruction of the device, and then we use computer software to track the fragments that resulted, so we could actually tell how fast the fragments were moving. When we had fragments whose mass was known, we were able to track the momentum and kinetic energy. So we're actually getting into the physics IED explosions. Let me just show you that. Here comes the tracks. To those colored tracks is a different piece that's leading the scene of the explosion. We know the size scale in the video, and so we can actually back calculate velocity out of that. The other thing that's interesting is that this line right here on the device is where the fuse was. You can see that the explosion happens immediately around the fuse, which is buried inside the powder inside the device. We could see differences and for example, how plastic PDC devices and steel devices would fracture differently and we capture all of that detail by using high speed videography. We've done quantitative analysis of the residues. What you're looking at here is a heat map showing a deconstructive pipe on each of the end caps of the pipe is on the other end, this is the pipe body in the middle. And the shading is the concentration of bentroglycerin, which is one of the chemical residues of an explosive. We've been able to do this where we can actually show or map out where explosive residue is. This has a direct impact on a forensic chemist job because when you're a forensic chemist, you don't witness the explosion, of course, all you get is the pieces that remain. And so this finding that all these end caps were significantly more loaded up with residue triglycern relative to the inside. Led us to make this recommendation that if you're looking for residue and you want to try to find the highest concentration, and therefore be most able to detect that, you can look at the end caps. The caps that make the ends collect that residue during the explosion. Some Mare pictures here. Upper left. We're looking at one of the pipe bodies, actually being able to pierce through three quarter inch plywood. These explosions are tremendously violent. All of them were carried out at standoff distances to protect us and our equipment, and we're done by the Indiana State Police bomb squad. Here in the middle is a picture of one of our collaborators gathering DNA. You can actually get DNA residue on a pipe from whoever built the pipe, and it survives. Not all the time, but it survives enough of the time that it's actually a viable technique to try to find a bomber by the DNA that they leave behind. We've got some shots of some dog testing that we've done with various agencies. Here's an example on the left of debris that you get from a pipe bomb explosion. It can vary in size and shape, depending on the instruction and the explosive. Here's another view of that apparatus that we used to gather residue. These are the witness plates that were a fixed for that apparatus. I got a group picture of me and some of the students that were involved in some of these projects, as well as a large explosion here is for demonstration purposes. This is C four and gasoline together making a very large fireball. We took part in a demonstration by the FBI that showed that. Okay. So to wrap up. Measurement science or analytical chemistry definitely has a huge effect on forensic chemistry because forensic chemists have to make a measurement in order to reach a conclusion in order to either identify or compare physical evidence. For us, we have focused on preserving, characterizing and explaining physical evidence, as well as other phenomena that are going on in either a fire or an explosion and are relevant to those types of investigations. It's definitely clear that none of our work would be possible without community partners. We've worked with a number of different agencies and I'll provide a list here next. This is where the trip part of our work really comes into play, that we're looking at designing these new procedures and instruments to place them in the hands of forensic chemists and law enforcement, as well as public safety personnel to directly affect their jobs, to make them more effective. And so along the way, there's been a number of different students that have been involved with this. So I've listed both undergraduates and graduate students that played a role either by doing their dissertation or thesis research in one of these areas. And our funding has largely come from either the Department of Justice or the Department of Defense. Both of which have been very enthusiastic about some of the work that we've been able to do. Of course, we partner with the Fire Department, the State Police bomb squad. The Kine work, there's been many agencies that have taken part in those. I've just listed a few here. And in order to get the data that we need to reach our conclusion, it really hinges upon these types of collaborations, which has been very rewarding. That concludes what I wanted to say. Thanks very much. I'd be happy to take any questions. Thank you so much, doctor Good Paster. We'd like to invite you to unshare your screen so that we could see everybody and encourage all of our guests to go ahead and show yourselves, turn on your video. And if you have a question, we'd invite you to raise your hand unmute and go ahead and ask the question. This is our chance to converse and to find out more about this work or the things that you want to know. So does anyone have a question they'd like to pose or comment? Go ahead, Holly. Thank you very much for your talk today. John, I really learned a lot. I microbial decomposition question really has less to do with explosives and the More to do with the way that you have addressed microbial decomposition impacted other fields with similar challenges. Is it being applied, for example, with my work in cultural heritage and archaeological collections, we're dealing with similar issues, and I'm wondering if that has an application. Okay. Well, the direct application to fire debris has definitely happened. You mentioned explosives, explosives can be degraded by bacteria as well. Bacterial action on explosives will actually transform them from their native form to typically a more reduced form. They take a functional group and turn it into an amino functional group. They basically will change the very nature of the explosive. With archaeological stuff, that's an interesting question because Maybe you should tell me more, but with that the actual degradation of items is the key thing as opposed to the degradation of chemical compounds, correct? Right. Right. Yeah. So there would be nothing keeping people from using this approach for that. The problem though, and I've worked some with the Indianapolis Museum of Art with their preservation of art objects. I'm not sure how well it would go over to spray something with a chemical. Right. Right. If that would be kind of voted in terms of interfering too much with the objects. Right. And you mentioned non corrosive, but of course, your level of preservation and the goal for antiquities would be different, right? So we're trying to preserve in perpetuity. Ground. And then I have a second question, if I may. And I can't help, but, you know, just be intrigued by this work with the crime lab. Love the play on words, so fun. But you said, canines will find what they are trained to find. So again, forgive me for pushing this a little bit beyond the investigation of explosives. But I'm wondering about the use of cadaver dogs and whether their skills and training could be used to authenticate, for example, mummified remains. So. Again, you know, I can't help but take everything you're sharing with us and sort of apply it to my world. But we often get, for example, I'll give you a very good example. We often get bundles that are labeled infant mummy, for example. Now, they may actually be looted mummies from tombs in South South America, but they can also be faked very easily and sold for a lot of money. So this does intersect with the issue of law enforcement. But I'm wondering if dogs could be ed in that way to authenticate Mummified remains. Okay. Well, then I guess a question I'll need to know the answer to is, when they do this faking or forgery, are they using modern remains that are just masquerade? Yeah. Well, so it could be as simple as could cadaver dogs, crime crime labs be used to detect what looks very much like a real mummy. But there are no human remains inside. So can they go. You know, So visually, they've got the motifs right. Maybe they're even using, you know, tea bags and coffee for staining to make things look very convincing. Right. But, if we don't have the ability to x ray that particular piece, then are cadaver dogs able to walk up very quickly to a large group of items and pick out the ones that contain human remains? Yeah. Well, I think my short answer is possibly yes. Because cadaver dogs are trained to find recently deceased people. Uh uh. And so there's a lot of work going on in terms of the chemistry, the odor of decay, human decay, and those odors are then used to train dogs. They've got the same issue with pseudocens. They have their own version of a pseudocent versus real tissue and training on the real thing. But can dog might be expected if it's a has no human rains in it. You would expect a negative result. Right. That's indeed possible, I think. I've never seen it done, and dogs right now are search and rescue or recovery purposes. But it's an interesting idea. Well, thank you again. It was a fascinating talk, and you've got to be sinking in all directions. Well, thank you, Holly for asking that question, because you are evidence of why we do this and the magic that happens when people share ideas and we think about them and translate them to other places. So yeah, you get a gold star for the day. We have time for maybe one more comment question before we would begin to wrap up our time today in this conversation. Does anyone else have something they wanted to ask about or share a question or a comment? I see that there's a question in the chat about why specimens are stored in paint cans? Yeah. And the reasoning is pretty straightforward. A paint can is strong, will be easily crushed air tight and you get them new and clean. And so they make a p ideal container for a lot of different types of evidence, including sen and explosives evidence. So the couple of things that I took away from this that were just also very interesting to me, was that you had made a comment that DNA survives on a pipe bomb, which was amazing to me that that could happen, and that's a really important discovery item. Yeah. That initial discovery was made by Michigan State University Alma, actually. And since then, people have been able to reproduce those results. So for us, like 10-20% of the time, we were able to recover DNA that gave us a full DNA profile. Which is like a home run. If you get a full DNA profile, then you develop a suspect, then that's fantastic. But it was only ten to 20% of the time. DNA a pretty rugged molecule. But again, we're talking about pretty violent conditions. But it's still, I would say worth it because when you get that profile, it's tremendously powerful. Yeah, that's amazing. The other remarkable thing I wanted to just make sure everybody noticed was throughout your conversation, you really highlighted the connections with community partners, but also the involvement of students and how important that is. A lot of our work that happens here at IUPUI involves students from bachelor level all the way up through post graduate degree. It's a great opportunity for our learners to have the chance to really get involved hands on with this work and to see where that goes. Because they're with community partners, my goodness, the opportunities for what we do, and finding those translations and connections that is just amazing. Oh, definitely will that be possible without students. That's right. Yeah. And it's a great opportunity. And it's just really nice evidence about the power of this place and what we do here. Doctor Banz, I notice you unmuted. So were you going to say something? I just want to thank, John. It was a great presentation. You've done a lot of good work since you came. And as Steve just said your involvement as students, and it always sort of puts a smile on my face when I hear that you're going to talk about the work both because somehow the image of an explosion was a pretty good one sometimes to an administrator. But not most of the time. But the other is is ally so clearly illustrated, the ability to stimulate thinking across disciplines and especially like the question that the mummy raises because of what is the effect of the chemicals in mummification and how do you dogs apparently can be trained to sort those out, which is a huge huge advantage to learn. Yeah. And I thought the test you ran on comparing the pseudo was a terrific one because somebody's created a business out of something without the data to show that it has the validity and need and something as important as crime. So really terrific presentation. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks for hiring me. Absolutely. Well, thanks for all your work and for contributing here at IEPI. And so what we want to do is close out this session and remind you that next month, we'll be back again in September, and we've invited Sylvia Begati to come and talk about her work commun gage work with the Latin X population. We have lots of other activities coming up in October. We'll be doing our annual fall showcase where you can learn more about translational work here at IEPI, on 14 October at 5:00. And in that afternoon on 14 October, we'll also introducing the Bans Community Fellow and the Bans Community Scholar awards for this year and having an opportunity to talk with some of our past awardees in a longer conversation to dive more deeply into their work. So there's so much going on. We hope that you'll take advantage of learning more about it. We're going to invite you now to go ahead and leave the Zoom if you want. So you can prepare for your 1:00 meeting. The rest of us are going to hang around here. If you wanted to say something to doctor Goodpast or you had a question, we'll be here for just a few more minutes as we wrap up, but we want to thank you for attending and for all that you do in partnership with I EPI and the Center for translating research into practice. Have a great day and a great weekend.