Chromatographia (2021) 84:413–423

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10337-021-04022-1

ORIGINAL

A Forensic Approach to Evaluate the Effect of Different Matrices

and Extraction Solvents for the Identification of Diesel Residue
in Simulated Arson by GC–MS
Vijay Kumar Yadav1 · Tanurup Das1 · Abhimanyu Harshey1 · Murali Manohar Yadav1 · Kriti Nigam1 ·
Ankit Srivastava1 

Received: 21 December 2020 / Revised: 19 February 2021 / Accepted: 23 February 2021 / Published online: 7 March 2021
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE part of Springer Nature 2021

Abstract
Investigation of an arson case presents several challenges to the forensic investigator. Identification of the ignitable liquid
residues in the fire debris is one of the crucial tasks that may help to determine the nature and cause of fire. Detection of the
ignitable liquids using different analytical methods has been practiced for a long period across the globe. Diesel is a petro-
leum product that shows stable burning than gasoline and it is frequently used as accelerant also. This study was conducted
to diagnose the efficiency of solvent as well as of the matrices for the detection of diesel residue. In this study, four different
matrices (cotton cloth, wood, glaze tile, and PVC) were selected to create simulated miniature version of arson with diesel as
an accelerant. After extinguishing the fire, diesel residues were extracted from the fire debris using hexane and diethylether
as extraction solvents under ultrasonication. Gas Chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry was used to identify
the major compounds from standard and burnt diesel. Diethylether extracted higher amount of diesel residues from the
burnt matrices than hexane. Tile and cotton proved to be the better matrices for the extraction in hexane solvent. However,
diethylether present advantageous results and significantly detected the diesel residues in tile, wood and cotton. Findings of
this study may help an investigator to select the suitable matrices and solvent for the extraction of diesel residues and may
efficaciously contribute in the forensic arson investigation.

Keywords  Arson · Forensics · Ignitable liquids · Diesel · GC–MS

Introduction
Arson is one of the most heinous offences against the man-
kind that causes serious harms to the property and the lives.
Detection and analysis of the ignitable liquid (IL) traces
in fire debris is crucial task that provides the information
of evidential significance [1]. Investigation of an arson
case presents several challenges to the forensic investiga-
tor. Extreme destructive nature of the fire destroys many
significant clues at scene of occurrence. In addition, deg-
radation due to weathering, as well as, extinguishers (e.g.,
water, sand, and commercial fire extinguisher) also adversely
* Ankit Srivastava
ankit_forensic81@rediffmail.com
1 and activated carbon strips (ACS) has been reported as well
Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Institute of Forensic Science &
Criminology, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, UP 284128,
India
affects the fire debris samples [2, 3]. Petroleum products
such as gasoline, diesel, and kerosene are commonly used
by arsonist as an accelerant. Diesel is most common petro-
leum product that is easily available in open market as well
as frequently used as an accelerant by an arsonist. Different
hydrocarbons ranging from C8 to C23 are present in the die-
sel. Aromatic compounds such as alkyl-benzene have found
to most abundant in diesel while, naphthalene-based com-
pounds have reported to be less than that of previous ones
[4–6]. In the forensic context, while detecting the IL residue
(hereinafter called ILR), the role of extraction method, and
the analytical technique becomes very critical and utmost
important. Extraction process enables the preconcentration
of the fire debris sample prior to the instrumental analysis.
Wide range of extraction methods namely solvent extraction,
headspace (HS) with solid-phase micro-extraction (SPME),
as research and analytical progress has also been reviewed
[7]. Extraction process is followed by the instrumental

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

414 V. K. Yadav et al.

analysis to detect the ILRs. Different analytical tools such as potentially recovered from the partially burnt remind, as the
gas chromatography (GC), isotope ratio mass spectroscopy absorbed petroleum in completely burnt material exhaust
(IRMS), capillary electrophoresis (CE), laser-induced break- during the whole burning process [17]. Hence, in the present
down spectroscopy (LIBS) [8], derivative ultra-violet (UV) study, the burning time has been kept low (approximately
spectroscopy [9], vibrational spectroscopy (infrared (IR) 30 s.) to simulate the partial burning phenomenon. A similar
spectroscopy and Raman spectroscopy) [10], and electronic timeframe had been used by Prather et al. in their study on
nose [11] have been reported for the detection of ILRs [12]. the effectiveness of evaporation of ignitable liquids from
GC has being applied for the detection of ILRs for a very different matrices [18]. Different household matrices such
long time [13]. Over the period, different variants of GC as Wood, Cotton Cloth, Tile, and Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)
namely GC-flame ionization detector (GC-FID), GC-photo were simulated for arson using diesel as an accelerant. Influ-
ionization detection (GC-PID), GC–mass spectroscopy ence of different solvents on the extraction of the ILRs from
(GC–MS), and multi-dimensional GC have been reported the samples was also accessed. GC–MS characterization of
for the ILR analysis [14]. GC-FID has been a technique of the samples provides some significant findings that may be
choice for the arson analyst. Chromatogram recorded from helpful for the forensic purpose.
the fire debris sample may be compared with the chroma-
togram of known IL samples. Substrate may produce the
chromatogram that may completely or partially overlap with
the peaks of the accelerant and thus either IL may remain Experimental Section
unidentified or may be misinterpreted. Therefore, the inter-
pretation of the results requires an utmost care to obviate Materials
the misclassification. GC–MS analysis improves the speci-
ficity of the analysis then that of GC-FID. Total Ion Chro- Diesel, purchased from the local fuel station, was used as
matogram (TIC) offers the identification of the compound accelerant in this study. Wood (12 × 12 × 0.8 cm), Cotton
by interpreting the peak through its retention time (RT) and Cloth (12 × 12 × 0.1 cm), Tile (12 × 12 × 0.8 cm), and PVC
mass spectrum (m/z). The standard of American Society (12 × 12 × 0.3 cm) purchased from local market were used
for Testing and Materials (ASTM E1618-19) recommends as matrices. Hexane and diethylether of analytical grade
the use of GC–MS for the analysis of ILRs in fire debris purchased from Merck life science Pvt. Ltd. were used as
samples. In addition, ASTM presents a classification scheme solvents for the extraction.
that classifies the ILs into 8 categories. The interpretation of
the result is the challenge for the analyst and dependent of
the experience of the analyst [15]. Previously, Zhang et al.
[5] reported the detection of diesel residues in a bus arson Table 1  Experimental conditions
samples and presented the interference of internal decora- GC operational protocol
tive materials in the diesel samples. The authors emphasized
Injection temperature 280 °C
on the proper sampling and adoption of the proper GC–MS
Split ratio 25:1
method for the effective detection of the diesel. Aqel et al.
Carrier gas Helium
(2016) [16] reported the detection of gasoline and diesel in
Flow rate 0.7 ml ­min−1
different cloth samples using GC–MS. Persistence of the
Column DB-5 (30 m × 0.25 mm,
accelerants on cotton and polyesters were recorded less than 0.25 μm film thick-
that of wood and silk. In addition, Ji and co-authors [6] pro- ness)
nounced that the polyurethane wood causes significant inter- Initial oven temperature 75 °C (hold for 1 min)
ference in diesel identification, and therefore, advocate the Ramp rate 20 °C ­min−1
need of negative control diesel samples and proper database Final oven temperature 280 °C
of compounds that may be used for the effective interpreta- MS operational protocol
tion of the diesel presence.
In this paper, we present the detection of diesel form the  Transfer line temperature 285 °C
simulated arson debris samples. In a typical arson scenario,  MS ionization source temperature 230 °C
majorly two kinds of remainings are found, i.e., partially  Mass quadrupole analyser temperature 150 °C
burnt and completely burnt. While, the accelerant can be  m/z scan mode 50–550

13
A Forensic Approach to Evaluate the Effect of Different Matrices and Extraction Solvents for… 415

Fig. 1  Total ion chromatogram

of unburnt standard diesel sam-
ple in hexane

Preparation and Extraction of Samples negative samples of all the matrices (matrices were burnt
without any accelerants) were prepared in both solvents,
5 ml of diesel was added to each piece of substrate and were i.e., hexane and diethylether. Thus, total 50 samples were
left undisturbed for 4 min and followed by the burring for analyzed by GC–MS in this approach.
30 s in a fume-hood. The identification of petroleum product
from an arson scene is only possible from the partially burnt
or semi-burnt materials. While, most of the time, no traces
GC–MS Analysis
of any petroleum products recovered from completely burnt
All the samples were analyzed by Agilent 7890B-5977A
remainings.
GC–MS. Experimental conditions are as summarized in
A beaker was placed inverted on the burning sample to
Table 1.
cease the oxygen supply thereby causing the extinguish-
ing of the fire. Burnt matrices were immediately placed in
a glass baker and 15 ml of extraction solvent was added.
Separate samples of each substrate were prepared for both
Results and Discussion
extraction solvents. This arrangement was ultra-sonicated
The present study has been carried out to identify the
for 10 min. Solvent was filtered and processed for GC–MS
extracted diesel residues from different burnt matrices. Real-
analysis. 5 samples of each substrate in both solvents were
life arson situation was simulated in miniature form to carry
prepared. In addition, as per the ASTM manual (ASTM E
out the experiment.
1386- 15) [19], standard samples of diesel (1% V/V) and

Fig. 2  Comparative efficiency
of extracted diesel residues
through hexane from different
matrices (Post-Burnt). HSD
standard diesel in hexane,
HDC diesel burnt with cot-
ton, extracted with Hexane,
HDW diesel burnt with wood,
extracted with hexane, HDT
diesel burnt with tile, extracted
with hexane, HDPVC diesel
burnt with PVC, extracted with
hexane

13

416
Fig. 3  Total ion chromatogram of the post-burnt diesel residues extracted through hexane from different matrices: (a) tile, (b) wood, (c) cotton
and (d) PVC
Intra‑comparison of Samples Extracted by Hexane
In the TIC of standard diesel samples in hexane (Fig. 1),
overall, 40 major organic compounds of 6 different classes
were detected. Among these compounds, simple alkanes,
branched alkanes and fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) are
the major contributors for diesel. The samples extracted
from cotton and PVC, burnt with diesel showed the high-
est (32) and lowest (1) number of similar compounds,
respectively, with the standard among the all four differ-
ent burnt matrices (Fig. 2). Figure 3 represents the TIC
of the extracted samples from tile, wood, cotton and PVC
by hexane. Table 2 shows the compounds common with
standard diesel, found in the burnt extracts of matrices.
While, 5 compounds from wood and 3 compounds identi-
fied from tile samples. The number of m/z ratios of diesel
found in the standard and burnt samples also supports the
results obtained from the TIC (Table 4).
Intra‑comparison of Samples Extracted
by Diethylether
The GC–MS analysis of the standard diesel samples in
diethylether showed similar results as obtained in hexane.
Similar to the samples in hexane, simple alkanes, branched
alkanes and FAME are the major contributors (Table 3).
13
V. K. Yadav et al.
Figure 4 shows the TIC of the standard diesel sample in
diethylether. The samples extracted from tile and PVC,
burnt with diesel showed the highest (33) and lowest
(1) number of similar compounds, respectively, with the
standard among the four different matrices (Fig. 5). While,
22 compounds from wood and 12 compounds identified
from cotton samples. Figure 6 represents the TIC of the
extracted samples from tile, wood, cotton and PVC by
diethylether. The mass spectrometric data support the TIC
obtained from all the samples (Table 4). Figure 7 shows
the negative samples extracted from burnt tile, wood, cot-
ton and PVC burnt without diesel. The negative samples
lacking the significant compound peaks present in diesel.
Efficiency of Extraction
As the obtained results of the residues extracted from four
different matrices, diethylether proved to be the more effi-
cient solvent than hexane. Figure 8 clearly elaborates the
aforesaid statement as relatively significant number of com-
pounds were identified from the diesel residues extracted
from wood and tile by diethylether than extracted by hexane.
While, diesel residues extracted by hexane from burnt cotton
gave highly significant similarity with the standard results
and residues extracted by diethylether gave relatively lesser
number of similar compounds (12) but all the compounds
A Forensic Approach to Evaluate the Effect of Different Matrices and Extraction Solvents for… 417

Table 2  List of the common compounds of diesel found in different substrates from post-burnt extracted samples by hexane
Compound class HSD HDT HDW HDC HDPVC

Simple alkanes Tetradecane Dodecane Eicosane

Pentacosane
Hexadecane
Heptadecane
Octadecane
Nonadecane
Dodecane
Eicosane
Branched alkanes 2,6-Dimethyldecane
Tetradecane, 6,9-dime-
thyl-
Tetradecane, 2,6,10-tri-
methyl-
Pentadecane, 2,6,10-tri-
methyl-
Pentadecane,
2,6,10,14-tetramethyl-
Hexadecane, 2,6,10-tri-
methyl-
Hexadecane, 7-methyl-
Heptadecane, 2,6-dime-
thyl-
Heptadecane,
2,6,10,14-tetramethyl-
Heptadecane,
2,6,10,15-tetramethyl-
Heptadecane, 9-hexyl-
7-Methyl-octadecane
Octadecane, 3-ethyl-5-(2-
ethylbutyl)-
Octadecane, 6-methyl-
Dodecane, 4-methyl-
Dodecane, 2,6,10-trime-
thyl-
Dodecane, 2,6,11-trime-
thyl-
Tetrapentacontane,
1,54-dibromo-
Cycloalkane n-Butyl cyclohexane
n-Pentyl cyclohexane
Fatty acid methyl ester Pentadecanoic acid,
14-methyl-, methyl ester
Hexadecanoic acid,
methyl ester
Hexadecanoic acid,
2-methyl-, methyl ester
Heptadecanoic acid,
15-methyl-, methyl ester
Heptadecanoic acid,
16-methyl-, methyl ester
8-Octadecenoic acid,
methyl ester
11-Octadecenoic acid,
methyl ester, (Z)-
12-Octadecenoic acid,
methyl ester
cis-13-Octadecenoic acid,
methyl ester
Nonadecanoic acid,
methyl ester
2,6-Dimethyldecane
Pentadecane, 2,6,10-tri-
methyl
Hexadecane, 7-methyl-
n-Butyl cyclohexane
12-Octadecenoic acid,
methyl ester
Heptadecane
Hexadecane
Nonadecane
Octadecane
Pentacosane
Tetradecane
Heptadecane, Tetradecane, 6,9-dime-
2,6-dime- thyl-
thyl- Tetradecane, 2,6,10-tri-
Dodecane, methyl-
4-methyl- Pentadecane,
2,6,10,14-tetramethyl-
Hexadecane, 2,6,10-tri-
methyl-
Heptadecane,
2,6,10,14-tetramethyl-
Heptadecane,
2,6,10,15-tetramethyl-
Heptadecane, 9-hexyl-
7-Methyl-octadecane
Octadecane, 3-ethyl-5-(2-
ethylbutyl)-
Octadecane, 6-methyl-
Dodecane, 2,6,10-trime-
thyl-
Dodecane, 2,6,11-trime-
thyl
Tetrapentacontane,
1,54-dibromo-
n-Pentyl cyclohexane
Pentadecanoic acid, 11-Octadecenoic
14-methyl-, methyl ester acid, methyl
Hexadecanoic acid, ester, (Z)-
methyl ester
Hexadecanoic acid,
2-methyl-, methyl ester
Heptadecanoic acid,
15-methyl-, methyl ester
Heptadecanoic acid,
16-methyl-, methyl ester
8-Octadecenoic acid,
methyl ester
cis-13-Octadecenoic acid,
methyl ester
11-Octadecenoic acid,
methyl ester, (Z)-
Nonadecanoic acid,
methyl ester

13

418 V. K. Yadav et al.

Table 2  (continued)
Compound class HSD HDT HDW HDC HDPVC

Aromatics 1,2,3,5-tetramethyl 1,2,3,5-tetramethyl

Benzene Benzene
Alcohol Ethanol, 2-(octadecy- Ethanol, 2-(octadecy-
loxy)- loxy)-

identified in the results are target compounds for diesel potentially caused due to the physical structure of the matrix
which can be relevant for the identification. The variabil- and the affinity of the residual diesel (unburnt or partially
ity of the extracted compounds from different matrices is burnt) with the extraction solvents.

Table 3  List of the common compounds of diesel found in different substrates from post-burnt extracted samples by diethylether
Compound class DESD DEDT DEDW DEDC DEDPVC

Simple alkanes Tetradecane Tetradecane Tetradecane Heptadecane

Pentacosane Pentadecane Hexadecane Dodecane
Hexadecane Hexadecane Heptadecane
Heptadecane Heptadecane Dodecane
Octadecane Octadecane
Nonadecane Nonadecane
Dodecane Dodecane
Eicosane Eicosane
Branched alkanes 2,6-Dimethyldecane 2,6-Dimethyldecane Tetradecane, Tetradecane,
Tetradecane, 6,9-dime- Tetradecane, 2,6,10-trimethyl- 2,6,10-trimethyl-
thyl- 2,6,10-trimethyl- Tetradecane, 6,9-dime- Heptadecane,
Tetradecane, Tetradecane, 6,9-dime- thyl- 2,6,10,14-tetrame-
2,6,10-trimethyl- thyl- Hexadecane, thyl-
Pentadecane, Pentadecane, 2,6,10-trimethyl- Heptadecane,
2,6,10-trimethyl- 2,6,10-trimethyl- Heptadecane, 2,6,10,15-tetrame-
Pentadecane, Heptadecane, 2,6,10,14-tetrame- thyl-
2,6,10,14-tetrame- 2,6,10,14-tetrame- thyl- Heptadecane,
thyl- thyl- Heptadecane, 2,6-dimethyl-
Hexadecane, Heptadecane, 2,6,10,15-tetrame- Heptadecane, 9-hexyl-
2,6,10-trimethyl- 2,6,10,15-tetrame- thyl- Octadecane, 6-methyl-
Hexadecane, 7-methyl- thyl- Heptadecane, 9-hexyl- Octadecane, 3-ethyl-
Heptadecane, Hexadecane, Octadecane, 6-methyl- 5-(2-ethylbutyl)-
2,6-dimethyl- 2,6,10-trimethyl- Octadecane, 3-ethyl- Dodecane, 2,6,10-tri-
Heptadecane, Hexadecane, 7-methyl- 5-(2-ethylbutyl)- methyl-
2,6,10,14-tetrame- Heptadecane, 9-hexyl- Dodecane, 4-methyl- Tetrapentacontane,
thyl- 7-Methyl-octadecane Dodecane, 2,6,10-tri- 1,54-dibromo-
Heptadecane, Octadecane, 6-methyl- methyl-
2,6,10,15-tetrame- Octadecane, 3-ethyl- Dodecane, 2,6,11-tri-
thyl- 5-(2-ethylbutyl)- methyl-
Heptadecane, 9-hexyl- Dodecane, 4-methyl- Tetrapentacontane,
7-Methyl-octadecane Dodecane, 2,6,10-tri- 1,54-dibromo-
Octadecane, 3-ethyl- methyl-
5-(2-ethylbutyl)- Tetrapentacontane,
Octadecane, 6-methyl- 1,54-dibromo-
Dodecane, 4-methyl-
Dodecane, 2,6,10-tri-
methyl-
Dodecane, 2,6,11-tri-
methyl-
Tetrapentacontane,
1,54-dibromo-
Cycloalkane n-Butyl cyclohexane n-Butyl cyclohexane n-Pentyl cyclohexane n-PTentyl cyclohexane
n-Pentyl cyclohexane n-Pentyl cyclohexane

13
A Forensic Approach to Evaluate the Effect of Different Matrices and Extraction Solvents for… 419

Table 3  (continued)
Compound class DESD DEDT DEDW DEDC DEDPVC

Fatty acid methyl ester Pentadecanoic acid, Pentadecanoic acid, Pentadecanoic acid, Pentadecanoic acid, Pentadecanoic
14-methyl-, methyl 14-methyl-, methyl 14-methyl-, methyl 14-methyl-, methyl acid, 14-methyl-,
ester ester ester ester methyl ester
Hexadecanoic acid, Hexadecanoic acid, 8-Octadecenoic acid,
methyl ester 2-methyl-, methyl methyl ester
Hexadecanoic acid, ester 11-Octadecenoic acid,
2-methyl- Heptadecanoic acid, methyl ester, (Z)-
Heptadecanoic acid, 15-methyl-, methyl
15-methyl-, methyl ester
ester Heptadecanoic acid,
Heptadecanoic acid, 16-methyl-, methyl
16-methyl-, methyl ester
ester 8-Octadecenoic acid,
8-Octadecenoic acid, methyl ester
methyl ester cis-13-Octadecenoic
11-Octadecenoic acid, acid, methyl ester
methyl ester, (Z)- Nonadecanoic acid,
12-Octadecenoic acid, methyl ester
methyl ester
cis-13-Octadecenoic
acid, methyl ester
Nonadecanoic acid,
methyl ester
Aromatics 1,2,3,5-tetramethyl 1,2,3,5-tetramethyl 1,2,3,5-tetramethyl
Benzene Benzene Benzene
Alcohol Ethanol, 2-(octadecy- Ethanol, 2-(octadecy- Ethanol, 2-(octadecy-
loxy)- loxy)- loxy)-

Fig. 4  Total ion chromatogram

of unburnt standard diesel sam-
ple in diethyl ether

Statistical analysis of all the samples showed good effi-
ciency of data reproducibility. The number of compounds
and the number of m/z ratio identified in the residues
extracted from different matrices showed very low the stand-
ard deviation values ranges from 0.447214 to 1.81659, which
are significant for a good repetitive analysis. Table 5 depicts
the detailed standard deviation data for all the repeated sam-
ple study. Few previous studies on the identification of burnt
diesel residues reported significant results for different sub-
strates. Zhang et al. [5] performed the identification of diesel
residue from a simulated vehicle (Public Bus) arson scene.
For this experiment, the group created a real-life scenario of
a public bus with all the interior and exterior features and put
diesel fuel inside it and burnt it. Post burnt diesel samples
were extracted using Hexane and anhydrous sodium sulfate
was spread to absorb the moisture. After 10 min, all the
solutions were filtered and filtrates were volatilized to about
1 mL. GC–MS and GC–HS–MS were used to identify the
diesel residues and found satisfactory results but the com-
ponents of diesel substantially alter in different location due

13

420 V. K. Yadav et al.

Fig. 5  Comparative efficiency
of extracted diesel residues
through diethylether from dif-
ferent matrices (Post-Burnt).
DESD standard diesel in diethy-
lether, DEDC diesel burnt with
cotton, extracted with diethyl-
ether, DEDW diesel burnt with
wood, extracted with diethyl-
ether, DEDT diesel burnt with
tile, extracted with diethylether,
HDPVC diesel burnt with PVC,
extracted with diethylether

Fig. 6  Total ion chromatogram of the post-burnt diesel residues extracted through diethylether from different matrices: (a) tile, (b) wood, (c) cot-
ton, and (d) PVC

to their discrete burning patterns. Alkylbenzene and alkanes
were the major contributors for the unburnt and semi-burnt
diesel residues in the extracts. Polycyclic aromatic hydro-
carbons were the products of diesel combustion. This article
also reported the analysis of soot deposited on the window
glass, which contains significant amount of PAH. Porous
seats absorb the diesel, while the identification of diesel was
interfered by the decomposition of the material composi-
tion of the seat. Aqel et al. [16] selected wool, cotton, silk
and polyester as substrates to create simulated arson scene
by using gasoline and diesel. SPME method was used to
extract the residual samples from the burnt matrices. The
target compounds selected for the identification of diesel
ranges from tridecane to heptadecane of simple alkane class.
In addition, they kept the burnt sample up to 15 h after extin-
guishing. Majority of the target compounds for diesel were
identified on wool and silk substrates up to 12 h post-extin-
guish, in comparison to cotton and polyester surfaces. The
whole experiment concludes that diesel residues are more
persistent on different substrates than gasoline.

13
 Table 4  Representation of mass values of standard diesel samples and burnt samples extracted by hexane
Mass values of standard diesel samples and burnt samples extracted by hexane
HSD HDT HDW HDC HDPVC

41, 43, 55, 57, 71, 74, 82,83, 85, 91,
92, 97, 105, 106, 113, 119, 120,
127, 129, 141, 143, 145, 155, 159,
160, 169, 170, 180, 183, 185, 193,
198, 202, 207, 211, 212, 222, 225,
226, 227, 240, 252, 253, 254, 264,
268, 270, 272, 280, 281, 296, 305,
306, 326, 327, 333, 355, 377, 385,
387
Mass values of standard diesel samples and burnt samples extracted by diethylether
DESD
41, 43, 55, 57, 71, 85, 97, 113, 155,
170, 180, 207, 222, 264, 296
DEDT
43,57,71,85, 113, 155, 159, 170, 198, 41, 43, 55, 57, 74, 97, 113, 127, 129, 41, 55, 97, 180, 207, 222, 264, 296
253 141, 143, 145, 155, 159, 160, 169,
180, 183, 185, 193, 198, 199, 202,
207, 211, 212, 221, 222, 225, 226,
227, 240, 252, 253, 254, 255, 264,
268, 270, 272, 280, 281, 296, 298,
305, 306, 326, 327, 333, 355, 377,
385, 387
DEDW DEDC DEDPVC

41, 43, 55, 57, 71, 74, 82,83, 85, 91, 41, 43, 55, 57, 71, 74, 85, 97, 113, 41, 43, 55, 71, 85, 97, 113, 127, 141, 43, 57, 71, 74, 85, 113, 127, 129, 43,74,129,143,185,227,207
A Forensic Approach to Evaluate the Effect of Different Matrices and Extraction Solvents for…

92, 97, 105, 106, 113, 119, 120,
127, 129, 141, 143, 145, 155, 159,
160, 169, 170, 180, 183, 185, 193,
198, 202, 207, 211, 212, 222, 225,
226, 227, 240, 252, 253, 254, 264,
268, 270, 272, 280, 281, 296, 305,
306, 326, 327, 333, 355, 377, 385,
387
127, 129, 141, 143, 145, 155, 159,
160, 169, 170, 180, 183, 185, 193,
198, 199, 207, 221, 211, 222, 225,
227, 226, 240, 252, 253, 254, 255,
264, 268, 270, 272, 280, 281, 296,
298, 305, 306, 326, 327, 333, 377,
355, 385, 387
143, 145, 155, 159, 160, 169, 170,
180, 183, 193, 198, 202, 207, 211,
212, 222, 225, 227, 252, 253, 264,
280, 296, 305, 326, 327, 333, 355,
377, 385
141, 143, 145, 155, 159, 160, 169,
170, 183, 185, 193, 198, 202, 207,
211, 227, 253, 280, 296, 333

13
421

422 V. K. Yadav et al.

Fig. 7  Total ion chromatogram of the negative samples for different burnt matrices: (a) tile, (b) wood, (c) cotton, and (d) PVC

Fig. 8  Comparative efficiency of hexane and diethylether for the
extraction of post-burnt diesel residue from different matrices. HSD
standard diesel in hexane, HDC diesel burnt with cotton, extracted
with hexane, HDW diesel burnt with wood, extracted with hexane,
HDT diesel burnt with tile, extracted with hexane, HDPVC diesel
burnt with PVC, extracted with hexane, DESD standard diesel in
diethylether, DEDC diesel burnt with cotton, extracted with diethy-
lether, DEDW diesel burnt with wood, extracted with diethylether,
DEDT diesel burnt with tile, extracted with diethylether, HDPVC die-
sel burnt with PVC, extracted with diethylether

Table 5  Standard deviation of HDC HDW HDT HDPVC DEDC DEDW DEDT DEDPVC
the quantitative data obtained
from repeated analysis of burnt Compound-based standard deviation of the repeated analysis
extracts
 0.83666 0.447214 0.547723 0 0.894427 0.894427 0.83666 1.81659
m/z value-based standard deviation of the repeated analysis
 0.547723 0.83666 0.894427 0.447214 0.83666 0.83666 1.095445 0.894427

13
A Forensic Approach to Evaluate the Effect of Different Matrices and Extraction Solvents for…
Conclusion
The present study has been proposed to identify the post-
burnt diesel samples from four different matrices, i.e., cot-
ton, tile, wood and PVC by extracting with hexane and
diethylether. Significant results have been obtained from the
GC–MS analysis of burnt diesel extracts using hexane and
diethylether as solvents with ultrasonication. Forty major
compounds have been found on standard diesel samples.
While, in the burnt extracts, diethylether proved to be the
better extraction solvent for diesel than hexane due to its
relatively similar polarity than hexane with the accelerant.
After burning, significant number of target compounds for
diesel have been identified from tile and cotton in both sol-
vents and least number of compounds from PVC. Broadly,
the simple alkanes, branched alkanes and FAME were com-
pared for matching and branched alkanes were found in the
highest number in post-burnt samples than the two others
(simple alkanes and FAME). Finally, this study concludes
that the solvent combined with ultrasonication is still a good
method for the extraction of burnt diesel samples. While
glaze tile and cotton were found to be the good source for
the collection of burnt diesel samples. It is probably due to
the porous clay surface underneath the glossy upper surface
of tile and significant porous structure of cotton that absorbs
the accelerant and hold significant amount of the residue
after burning that is enough for the identification. Wood
holds relatively lesser number of similar compounds while
most of the diesel added in PVC sheet were burnt and only
one compound was found in burnt extract from this matrix.
Hence, there is a very low probability of identification of
diesel from nonporous matrices like PVC.
References
1. Sturaro A, Vianello A, Denti P, Rella R (2013) Fire debris analysis
and scene reconstruction. Sci Justice 53:201–205
2. Muller D, Levy A, Shelef R (2011) Detection of gasoline on arson
suspects’ hands. Forensic Sci Int 206:150
3. Gorbett GE, Meacham BJ, Wood CB, Dembsey NA (2015) Use
of damage in fire investigation: a review of fire patterns analysis,
research and future direction. Fire Sci Rev 4:4
4. Weber BM, Walsh P, Harynuk JJ (2016) Determination of Hydro-
carbon group-type of diesel fuels by gas chromatography with
vacuum ultraviolet detection. Anal Chem 88:5809–5817
5. Zhang Y, Zhu X, Zhao C, Peng B, Yang S, Xie L (2019) Study
of diesel residues from fire debris in a bus arson experiment. In:
423
Proceedings of 9th international conference on fire science and
fire protection engineering vol 2019, ICFSFPE, pp 1–6
6. Ji B, Liu S, Wang Y (2019) Identification of diesel residues
by GC-MS in Fire 2nd on international conference sustain-
able energy, environment and information engineering (SEEIE
2019). Adv Eng Res 184:2352
7. Martín-Alberca C, Ortega-Ojeda FE, García-Ruiz C (2016)
Analytical tools for the analysis of fire debris. A review: 2008–
2015. Analyt Chem Acta 928:1–19
8. Choi S, Yoh JJ (2017) Fire debris analysis for forensic fire inves-
tigation using laser induced breakdown spectroscopy. Spectro-
chim Acta B Atom Spectrosc 134:75–80
9. Yadav VK, Harshey A, Das T, Nigam K, Sharma K, Srivastava
A (2020) Effect of different matrices on the identification of
ignitable liquid residue in post burn arson debris: a multi-deriv-
ative UV-visible spectrophotometric approach. Asian J Chem
32(11):2880–2886
10. Yadav VK, Nigam K, Srivastava A (2020) Forensic investigation
of arson residue by infrared and Raman spectroscopy: from con-
ventional to non-destructive Techniques. Med Sci Law 60:1–10
11. Ferreiro-Gonzalez M, Barbero GF, Palma M et al (2016) Deter-
mination of ignitable liquids in fire debris: direct analysis by
electronic nose. Sensors 16:695
12. Stauffer E (2020) Interpol review of fire investigation 2016–
2019. Forensic Sci Int: Synergy. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisy​
n.2020.01.005
13. Lucas DM (1960) The identification of petroleum products
in forensic science by gas chromatography. J Forensic Sci
5:236–247
14. Bumbrah GS, Sarin RK, Sharma RM (2017) Analysis of petro-
leum products in fire debris residues by gas chromatography: a
literature review. Arab J Forensic Sci 1:560–583
15. American Society for Testing and Materials (2019) ASTM
E1618–19 standard test method for ignitable liquid residues in
extracts from fire debris samples by gas chromatography-mass
spectrometry. ASTM international, West Conshohocken, PA
16. Aqel A, Dhabbah AM, Yusuf K, AL-Harbi NM, Al Othman ZA,
Badjah-Hadj- Ahmed Y (2016) Determination of gasoline and
diesel residues on wool, silk, polyester and cotton materials by
SPME-GC-MS. J Anal Chem 71:7
17. Stauffer E, Dolan JA, Newman R (2008) Fire debris analysis. Aca-
demic Press
18. Prather KR, McGuffin VL, Smith RW (2012) Effect of evaporation
and matrix interferences on the association of simulated ignitable
liquid residues to the corresponding liquid standard. Forensic Sci
Int 222:242–251
19. American Society for Testing and Materials (2015) ASTM
E1386–15, standard practice for separation of ignitable liquid
residues from fire debris samples by solvent extraction. ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
13