Microscopical hair analysis has become a controversial practice within forensic science primarily due to issues related to interpretation, and specifically overstating the significance of an association. The validity of microscopical hair comparisons has suffered from intense scrutiny by the forensic community, with one criticism being a paucity of peer reviewed research. An even more limited aspect of forensic hair analysis is the study of the formation of a postmortem root band (PMRB). PMRB, also known as deadman’s or putrid root, is a band that forms slightly above the root bulb and below the skin surface on cadavers. Postmortem root banding can be used as a tool to determine the presence of a cadaver at a crime scene, corroborate witness and suspect testimonies, and create a rough estimate of post mortem interval. The formation of PMRB is still a minimally researched topic, despite some important research being recently published. Further, there are even fewer published studies on antemortem root banding (AMRB), which is the formation of a dark band in hair after being removed from living people. AMRB is formed from environmental conditions with factors that are poorly understood, thus it is often cited as a possible alternative explanation for the presence of PMRB in evidence hairs. It is critical to understand the specific conditions that can lead to the formation of AMRB so that the significance of finding a hair with PMRB can be properly interpreted. In this research, hairs were sampled (pulled) from voluntary individuals and analyzed with microscopic techniques before and after being subjected to various humidity, water, and temperature conditions. This experiment was completed in two phases, with the initial phase centered around the comparison of hairs in three conditions: room temperature, body temperature with no added humidity, and a high temperature with an added humidity in the form of a water pan. The second phase of this experiment focused on the