Skip to main content
Log in

Laboratory and field experiments used to identify Canis lupus var. familiaris active odor signature chemicals from drugs, explosives, and humans

  • Special Issue Paper
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes the use of headspace solid-phase microextraction (SPME) combined with gas chromatography to identify the signature odors that law enforcement-certified detector dogs alert to when searching for drugs, explosives, and humans. Background information is provided on the many types of detector dog available and specific samples highlighted in this paper are the drugs cocaine and 3,4-methylenedioxy-N-methylamphetamine (MDMA or Ecstasy), the explosives TNT and C4, and human remains. Studies include the analysis and identification of the headspace "fingerprint" of a variety of samples, followed by completion of double-blind dog trials of the individual components in an attempt to isolate and understand the target compounds that dogs alert to. SPME–GC/MS has been demonstrated to have a unique capability for the extraction of volatiles from the headspace of forensic specimens including drugs and explosives and shows great potential to aid in the investigation and understanding of the complicated process of canine odor detection. Major variables evaluated for the headspace SPME included fiber chemistry and a variety of sampling times ranging from several hours to several seconds and the resultant effect on ratios of isolated volatile components. For the drug odor studies, the CW/DVB and PDMS SPME fibers proved to be the optimal fiber types. For explosives, the results demonstrated that the best fibers in field and laboratory applications were PDMS and CW/DVB, respectively. Gas chromatography with electron capture detector (GC/ECD) and mass spectrometry (GC/MS) was better for analysis of nitromethane and TNT odors, and C-4 odors, respectively. Field studies with detector dogs have demonstrated possible candidates for new pseudo scents as well as the potential use of controlled permeation devices as non-hazardous training aids providing consistent permeation of target odors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 8.
Fig. 9.
Fig. 10.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Furton kg, Myers LJ (2001) Talanta 43:487–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Anon (1989) Crime and chemical analysis. In: Res News Sci 3/24:1555

  3. Oyler J, Darwin WD, Cone E (1996) J Anal Toxicol 20:213–216

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Negrusz A, Perry JL, Moore CM (1998) J Forensic Sci 43:626–629

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Furton kg, Hsu Y-L, Luo T, Alvarez N, Lagos P (1997) In Hicks J, De Forest P, Baylor VM (eds) Forensic evidence analysis and crime scene investigation, Proc SPIE 2941:56–62

  6. Furton kg, Hsu Y-L, Luo T, Rose S (1999) In: Higgins K (ed) Investigation and forensic science technologies, Proc SPIE 3576:136–141

  7. Furton kg, Hong Y, Hsu Y-L, Luo T, Rose S, Walton J (2002) J Chromatogr Sci 40:147–155

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Vu DT (2001) J Forensic Sci 46:1014–1024

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Anon (2001) Drug Identification Bible. Amera-Chem Grand Junction CO

  10. Shulgin AT (1986) J Psychoactive Drugs 18:291–304

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Davis WM, Borne RF (1984) Substance Alcohol Actions/Misuse 5:105–110

    Google Scholar 

  12. O'Brien BA, Bonicamp JM, Jones DW (1982) J Anal Toxicol 6:143–147

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Braun U, Shulgin AT, Braun G (1980) J Pharm Sci 69:192–195

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Inoue T, Tanaka K, Ohmori T, Togawa Y, Seta S (1994) Forensic Sci Int 69:97

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Perkal M, Ng YL, Pearson JR (1994) Forensic Sci Int 69:77–87

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Verweij A (1990) Forensic Sci Int 45:91–96

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Renton R (1993) Forensic Sci Int 60:189–202

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mas F (1995) Forensic Sci Int 71:225–231

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Lorenzo N (2002) MS thesis, FIU

  20. Fetterolf DD (1995) In: J Yinon (ed) Forensic applications of mass spectrometry. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 215–257

  21. Hallowell SF, Fisher DS, Brasher JD, Malone RL, Gresham G, Rae C (1997) In: Pilon P, Burmeister S (eds) Chemistry and biology-based technologies for contraband detection, Proc SPIE 2937:227–234

  22. Kolla P (1997) In: Pilon P, Burmeister S (eds) Chemistry and biology-based technologies for contraband detection, Proc SPIE, 2937:236–244

  23. Williams M, Johnston JM, Cicoria M, Paletz E, Waggoner LP, Edge CC, Hallowell SF (1998) In: DePersia AT, Pennella JJ (eds) Enforcement and securities technologies, Proc SPIE 3575:291–301

  24. Wan T (2002) MS thesis, FIU

  25. Schoon GAA (1998) J Forensic Sci 43:70–75

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Killam EW (1990) The detection of human remains. Thomas

  27. Komar D (1999) J Forensic Sci 44:405–408

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Haglund WD, Sorg MH (1997) Forensic taphonomy. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL

  29. Rebmann A, David E, Sorg MH (2000) Cadaver dog handbook. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL

  30. Tahim NM, Bennett LW, Shellem TA, Doerr JA (2002) J Agric Food Chem 50:5012–5015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bonilla M, Enriquez LG, McNair HM (1997) J Chromatogr Sci 35:53–56

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim H, Nochetto C, McConnell LL (2002) Anal Chem 74:1054–1060

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the numerous graduate and undergraduate students who assisted in the laboratory and field experiments, members of the various drug dog detection teams who participated in this study and the trainers who coordinated the field testing including Sgt Wesley Dallas and Officer Allen Lowy of the Miami-Dade Police department, Trooper Mike Van Leer of the Florida Highway Patrol (FHP), and Bob Anderson of the Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office. Partial financial support from Supelco, Inc., and the National Forensic Science Technology Center (NFSTC) is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kenneth G. Furton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lorenzo, N., Wan, T., Harper, R.J. et al. Laboratory and field experiments used to identify Canis lupus var. familiaris active odor signature chemicals from drugs, explosives, and humans. Anal Bioanal Chem 376, 1212–1224 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-003-2018-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-003-2018-7

Keywords

Navigation