An insight into different types of maceration and skeleton preparation techniques

Introduction

Skeletal material is essential for osteology instruction because it enables direct examination of anatomical features such as shape, orientation, joints, foramina, and specialized adaptations. Properly prepared skeletons serve diverse purposes, including education, anatomical comparison, surgical planning, forensic analysis, species identification, museum exhibitions, and research. In contrast to wet specimens, dry skeletons can be preserved for decades when properly cleaned, assembled, and stored. (Mandler et al., 2026; Javid et al., 2023; Savitri et al., 2023; Kaliyamoorthy et al., 2022; Singh, 2017) [1,2,3,4,5] Skeleton preparation encompasses a series of procedures that begin with documenting the carcass and end with preserving or assembling the bones. During this process, skin, organs, muscles, and other soft tissues are removed while preserving critical anatomical structures. The primary challenge is removing soft tissue without compromising cartilage, collagen, delicate bone plates, or small, difficult-to-repair bones. Historically, skeletal preparation relied on burial or natural decomposition. Contemporary laboratories employ enzyme solutions, dermestid beetle colonies, temperature-controlled baths, advanced degreasing techniques, and digital imaging. These innovations allow practitioners to tailor preparation methods to the specimen's size, age, fat content, and intended application, rather than relying solely on traditional approaches. (Mandler et al., 2026; Savitri et al., 2023; Kirbach et al., 2026) [1,3,6]

Basis of skeleton preparation

Bone consists of both mineral and organic components. The mineral fraction, primarily hydroxyapatite crystals, imparts strength, while the organic matrix, mainly type-I collagen, provides toughness and resistance to fracture. Excessively harsh cleaning may result in visually clean bones that subsequently flake, warp, or fracture due to collagen degradation. Therefore, preparation methods should prioritize preservation of bone integrity over processing speed. (Singh, 2017; Popp et al., 2023; Bittner-Frank et al., 2025) [5,7,8] Alkalis saponify lipids and hydrolyze proteins, while soil organisms facilitate decomposition of buried remains. Dermestid larvae consume desiccated tissue. Microbial enzymes degrade proteins during maceration, with protease activity optimized at specific pH and temperature ranges. Heat denatures tissue, enabling manual removal. Each technique differentially impacts cartilage, ligaments, marrow fat, and bone, accounting for variability in specimen quality.

Characteristics for selection of a preparation method

An effective protocol should yield a specimen that is anatomically complete, structurally intact, free of residual tissue, dry, odorless, and stable during handling. In practice, the most advantageous method is one that achieves these outcomes while limiting permanent damage. ( [1,3,6] . Nasal conchae, auditory ossicles, sesamoid bones, hyoid components, and ju venile epiphyses are examples of delicate parts that should be preserved. There shouldn't be any heat cracks, warping, powdering, or chemical etching on the surface. To avoid subsequent yellowing and rancid odor, sufficient removal of marrow and cancellous fat is necessary. The procedure should enable the safe containment of biological dangers and the appropriate disposal of reagents or liquids. The final product should still be appropriate for labeling. Most preparation protocols adhere to a similar sequence, despite differences in specific techniques. Before cleaning, it is essential to document species, age category, sex, morphometric data, collection history, and any pathological findings. This information is irretrievable once the carcass has been deconstructed. (Mandler et al., 2026; Kirbach et al., 2026) [1,6] Method selection is guided by the biological characteristics of the specimen and the intended outcome. For example, museum voucher specimens require greater preservation than temporary teaching bones, and small reptile skulls necessitate different handling compared to adult bovine limbs.

1. Body size and species: Larger carcasses require longer degreasing times, larger containers, and more thorough defleshing.

2. Age: Loss or deformation is more frequent in juvenile skeletons since they have more cartilage and unfused epiphyses.

3. Fat content: Obese animals, pigs, and marine mammals may need to be repeatedly treated with a solvent or detergent.

4. Anatomical delicacy: Insect or enzyme-based cleaning is beneficial for fish, birds, reptiles, and small mammals.

5. Time and infrastructure: Warm-water systems require consistent temperature management but are quicker than passive maceration.

6. Use: Different preservation standards apply to research samples, museum vouchers, forensic exhibits, and articulated teaching mounts.

7. Safety and waste management: the laboratory's ability to control odors, contagious materials, alkali, or flammable solvents must be taken into account.

Classification of cleaning techniques

In practice, categories often overlap. For example, a specimen may undergo manual defleshing, warm-water maceration, detergent degreasing, and peroxide whitening. Combining mild procedures is often safer than relying on a single severe treatment. ( [1,3,6,9,10,11] (Figure 2)

Biosafety and environmental protection

Even when they appear to have decayed, carcasses can still contain zoonotic pathogens, and preparation processes may produce contaminated effluent, aerosols, splashes, or sharp pieces. Before skinning or maceration, a risk assessment should be completed. Without institutional approval and proper containment, materials suspected of rabies, anthrax, brucellosis, or another regulated pathogen should not be brought into a regular teaching preparation area. Personal protection:

Closed shoes, a lab coat or apron, and impermeable gloves.

Use protective goggles or a face shield when handling chemicals, splashing, or rinsing under high pressure.

Respiratory protection in areas where there may be mould, aerosols, or strong decomposition odors.

Supportive gloves that can withstand cuts when working with blades, wire, or sharp pieces of bone.

Only use concentrated peroxide and caustic alkali in a ventilated space with an eyewash station.

Acetone and other solvents should be kept away from sources of ignition in authorized flammable liquid containers.

Write the chemical name, concentration, date, and specimen identification on each bath label.

Unless the institutional safety procedure specifies compatibility, avoid combining cleaning products.

Waste disposal:

Alkali contaminated water, soft tissue, and solvent should all be kept apart. Chemical waste should be neutralized or collected by an authorized disposal system, whereas biological waste must adhere to institutional biomedical waste procedures. After all specimens, containers, equipment, and work surfaces have been thoroughly cleaned and sanitized.

Recent and emerging developments

Museums and outreach

Durable exhibits that demonstrate locomotor adaptation and comparative morphology.

Archaeology and zooarchaeology

Identification of animal remains, domestication patterns, diet and past human-animal relationships.

Taxonomy and morphometrics

Reference measurements, description of variation and comparison of skeletal characters.

Bioenzymatic Protocols

Selective tissue removal with lower chemical damage is made possible by fine-tuning the enzyme concentration, buffer composition, and incubation temperature. These methods are particularly useful for specimens that are small, delicate, or significant for study. (Mahon et al., 2021; Husch et al., 2021; Ramos-Bezerra et al., 2024) [9,10,12] Three-Dimensional Scanning And Printing Students can rotate, magnify, and compare bones without repeatedly handling rare originals thanks to surface scanning and CT-derived replicas. For teaching, surgical practice, and public presentation, three-dimensional prints can replicate diseased or species-specific features. (Kapoor, [13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18] Computer-Assisted Morphometry Automated measurements and digital landmarking provide objective comparisons between species, age groupings, or illness conditions. Because trustworthy algorithms rely on precisely defined and thoroughly documented content, these technologies augment rather than replace the reference skeleton. (Kapoor, 2024; Blackburn et al., 2024) [ 13, 14] (Figure 3 [18] .

High-quality skeleton preparation is achieved by adapting the method to the specific specimen, rather than prioritizing speed. For many mammalian specimens, passive or warm-water maceration yields reliable results. When preservation of delicate features is required, dermestid beetles and controlled enzymatic treatments are particularly effective. Aggressive chemical digestion presents significant risks to the organic bone matrix, while burial is economical but limits procedural control. [1,6,11,19] [13, 14, 16]

References

1. Mandler EM, Mittendorfer JM, Hirtler L. Bone maceration: A Systematic Review Of Techniques, Efficiency And Structural Outcomes. Ann Anat. 2026;267:152866.
2. Javid MA, Saleem MU, Waqas MY, Farooq AA, Murtaza S, Asif M. Improvement Of Veterinary Anatomy By Using Recent Scientific Techniques For Skeleton Preparation And Preservation. Pure Appl Biol. 2023;12(2):848-853.
3. Savitri, Yakkundi RC, Matapathi N, Talawar V. A Review Of Bone Preparation Techniques For Anatomical Studies. J Ayurveda Integr Med Sci. 2023;8(10):112-117.
4. Kaliyamoorthy K, Rajasekhar SSSN, Kumar VD. Procurement And Processing Of Human Bones In Medical Schools For Teaching Purposes: A Narrative Review. Indian J Clin Anat Physiol. 2022;9(4):245-251.
5. Singh B. Dyce, Sack and Wensing. Textbook Of Veterinary Anatomy. 5th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2017.
6. Kirbach M, Kohlt C, Möller WL, Rothschild MA, Petaros A. Forensic Maceration: A Comparative Analysis Of Literature And Practical Application. Int J Legal Med. 2026;140(3):1547-1564.
7. Popp AI, Lodovichi MV, Castillo DF, Casanave EB, Sidorkewicj NS. Effects Of Different Traditional Methods Of Cleaning Skeletal Material: Preliminary Evaluation Based On Scanning Electron Microscopy. J Plastination. 2023;35(1):1-19.
8. Bittner-Frank M, Strassl A, Unger E, Hirtler L, Kainberger F, Windhager R. Effect Of Hot Water Maceration, Rehydration, And Soft Tissue Presence On 3D Geometry Of Bone. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2025;21(1):98-106.
9. Mahon TJ, Matoke N, Myburgh J. The Use Of Different Detergents In Skeletal Preparations. Forensic Sci Int. 2021;327:110967.
10. Husch C, Berner M, Goldammer H, Lichtscheidl-Schultz I. Technical Note: A Novel Method For Gentle And NonDestructive Removal Of Flesh From Bones. Forensic Sci Int. 2021;323:110778.
11. Rastekar F, Monfared M. A Practical And Safe Alternative Method For Skeletal Cleaning For Museum Specimens Using Superworms Zophobas morio. PLoS One. 2026;21(7):e0349669.
12. Ramos-Bezerra AM, Celeste H, Soeiro A. The Use Of MultiEnzymatic Detergent For Cleaning Flesh From Bones Of Small Mammals Preserved In Fluid And Frozen. Bol Cient Mus Hist Nat Univ Caldas. 2024;28(2):87-101.
13. Kapoor K. 3D Visualization And Printing: An "Anatomical Engineering" Trend Revealing Underlying Morphology Via Innovation And Reconstruction Towards The Future Of Veterinary Anatomy. Anat Sci Int. 2024;99(2):159-182.
14. Blackburn DC, Boyer DM, Gray JA, Winchester J, Bates JM, Baumgart SL. Increasing The Impact Of Vertebrate Scientific Collections Through 3D Imaging: The Open Vertebrate (Overt) Thematic Collections Network. Bioscience. 2024;74(3):169-186.
15. De Silveira EE, da Silva Lisboa Neto AF, Pereira HCS, Ferreira JS, dos Santos AC, Sivero F. Canine Skull Digitalization And Three-Dimensional Printing As An Educational Tool For Anatomical Study. J Vet Med Educ. 2021;48(6):649-655.
16. Bakili C, Yunus HA, Batur B, Yalcin S, Ekim O, Oto C. Evaluating The Effectiveness Of 3D-Printed Bone Models As Educational Tools In Veterinary Anatomy: Insights From Students And Teachers. Vet J. 2025;314:106460.
17. Schirone R, Schmedding M, Weigner J, Werner M, Corte GM, Ehlers JP. The Impact Of Low-Fidelity Three-DimensionalPrinted Models Of The Equine Distal Limb And The Canine Forelimb In Teaching Veterinary Anatomy In Practical Classes. Animals (Basel). 2025;15(10):1380.
18. Sakaue M, Oishi M, Ozawa A, Tsukamoto A, Kayanuma H, Ichihara N. Availability And Issues Of 3D-Printed Skull Models For Veterinary Anatomy Laboratories From Students' Perspective Before And During The COVID-19 Pandemic. J Vet Med Sci. 2024;86(10):1081-1088.
19. Pahl A. Skeleton Preparation Best Practices In The Modern Museum: The Dermestid Approach. Curator. 2020;63(1):99-113.
20. Keyes CA, Giltrow KR, Mahon TJ. A Comparison Of Maceration Methods For The Preparation Of Infant Skeletal Remains For Forensic Anthropological Analysis. Int J Legal Med. 2024;138(3):1085-1092.
21. Picasso MBJ, Mosto MC, Tudisca AM. Preparing Skulls From Fluid-Preserved Birds: Evaluation Of Cleaning Methods In Rhea americana (Paleographer). Zoo morphology. 2026;145:23.
22. Armelli K, Christensen ER, Isaac C, Cornelison J. Steam Kettle Skeletal Preparation: An Efficient Method For Processing Human Remains. Forensic Anthropol. 2022;5(1):73-77.
23. Dunn R, Spiros M, Passalacqua N, Hefner J. Maceration For Human Fetal And Perinatal Bone. Forensic Anthropol. 2023;6(3):166-173.
24. As A Biotic Taphonomic Agent: Further Recommendations For Maintaining A Dermestid Beetle Colony For Processing Remains. J Forensic Sci. 2025;70(6):2198-2208.
25. Sizer SS, Kurt S, Onuk B, Pekmezci GZ, Kabak M. Obtaining Osteological Material Using Dermestes maculatus De Geer, (Coleoptera: Dermestidae) In Veterinary Anatomy. Pak J Zool. 2024;56(3):1125-1131.
26. Muñoz-Saba Y, Sánchez-Nivicela JC, Sierra-Durán CM, ViedaOrtega JC, Amat-García G, Muñoz R. Cleaning Osteological Specimens With Beetles Of The Genus Dermestes linnaeus, (Coleoptera: Dermestidae). J Nat Sci Collect. 2020;7:72-82.
27. Sanger Ciarleglio JE, Perez KM, Motola HL, DiGangi EA. Recommendations For Maintaining A Dermestid Beetle Colony (Dermestes maculatus) For Processing Human Remains. J Forensic Sci. 2020;65(5):1698-1703.
28. Timm RM, McLaren SB, Genoways HH. Innovations That Changed Mammalogy: Dermestid Beetles-The Better Way To Clean Skulls. J Mammal. 2020;101(4):923-925.
29. Leiggi P, May P. Vertebrate Paleontological Techniques. Vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994.
30. Umami M. Efficacy Study Of Eco-Friendly Bleaching Agent For Skeleton Preservation In Animal Skeleton. Biota. 2024;9(1):8390.
31. Patgiri S, Rajani CV, Patki HS, Surjith KP, Raghu NK, Indu VR. Preparation Of Dry Inflated Models Of Stomach, Intestine And Taxidermy Of Head In Equine. Indian J Vet Anat. 2022;34(1):5557.
32. König HE, Liebich HG. Veterinary Anatomy Of Domestic Animals: Textbook And Color Atlas. 7th Ed. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2020.
33. Hermanson JW, de Lahunta A. Miller and Evans. Anatomy Of The Dog. 5th Ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2020.
34. Kim SW, Yuen AHL, Poon CTC, Hwang JO, Lee CJ, Oh MK. Cross-Sectional Anatomy, Computed Tomography, And Magnetic Resonance Imaging Of The Banded Hound Shark (Triakis scyllium). Sci Rep. 2021;11:1165.
35. Rowley B. Protocols For Cleaning And Articulating Large Mammal Skeleton. Symposium. 2015;2(1):Article 3. How to cite this article: Lakshmi S, Shukla M, Ranjan R, Kumar PS, Reddy MA, Mewada R, et al. An insight into different types of maceration and skeleton preparation techniques. International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research. 2026;10(9):964-968. doi: https://www.doi.org/10.33545/2617469
36. Authors Sathiya Lakshmi M. V. Sc. Student, Batch 2025, Department of Veterinary Surgery, Co.V.Sc and A.H., Rewa, N.D.V.S.U., Madhya Pradesh, India Mansi Shukla Associate Professor, Department of Veterinary Anatomy, Co.V.Sc and A.H., Rewa, N.D.V.S.U., Madhya Pradesh, India Rajesh Ranjan Assistant Professor, Department of Veterinary Anatomy, Co.V.Sc and A.H., Rewa, N.D.V.S.U., Madhya Pradesh, India Patil Shiva Kumar M. V. Sc. Student, Batch 2025, Department of Veterinary Surgery, Co.V.Sc and A.H., Rewa, N.D.V.S.U., Madhya Pradesh-486001, India Mokkarla Amarnath Reddy M. V. Sc. Student, Batch 2025, Department of Veterinary Surgery, Co.V.Sc and A.H., Rewa, N.D.V.S.U., Madhya Pradesh, India Rahul Mewada M. V. Sc. Student, Batch 2025, Department of Veterinary Surgery, Co.V.Sc and A.H., Rewa, N.D.V.S.U., Madhya Pradesh, India Shivam Gupta M. V. Sc. Student, Batch 2025, Department of Veterinary Surgery, Co.V.Sc and A.H., Rewa, N.D.V.S.U., Madhya Pradesh, India Pankaj Patidar M. V. Sc. Student, Batch 2025, Department of Veterinary Surgery, Co.V.Sc and A.H., Rewa, N.D.V.S.U., Madhya Pradesh, India