Search

In 1992, Norm Sauer called for a language shift in which practitioners would move away from the socially loaded term "race" and replace it with the less provocative term "ancestry." While many heeded the call and moved towards ancestry in their research and reports, the actual approach to research and analysis did not change. In response to this change, there was a large growth in ancestry estimation method development in the early decade of the 2000s. However, the practice of ancestry estimation did not adequately incorporate evolutionary theory in interpretation or trait selection and continued with little critical reflection. In the past decade, there has been an increase in ancestry validation methods with little critique of the "race" concept or discussion of modern human variation or reference samples. To advance, forensic anthropologists need to reckon with the practice of ancestry estimation as it is currently practiced. We are calling for another reform in the axiom focusing on evolutionary theory, population history, trait selection, and population‐level reference samples. The practice needs to abandon the terms ancestry and race completely and recalibrate to an analysis of population affinity. Population affinity is a statistical approach based on the underlying population structure that would allow the understanding of how microevolutionary forces act in concert with historical events (e.g., colonization, the Transatlantic Slave Trade, etc.) to shape modern human variation. This is not to be confused with geographic ancestry that all too often can be perceived as interchangeable with social race and as an affirmation of the biological concept of race. It is time to critically evaluate the social and scientific implications of the current practice of ancestry estimation, and re‐frame our approach to studying and analyzing modern human variation through a population structure approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study investigates the utility of cervical measurements in deciduous teeth and how they correlate with traditional measurements of the crown. First, this study establishes definitions by which these measurements could reliably be taken. Next, deciduous cervical and traditional crown diameters were taken on three distinct skeletal samples: a Neolithic assemblage from Central Anatolia (Çatalhöyük, n = 85), a precontact sample from Northern California (CA-ALA-329, n = 34), and a group of intrusive burials interred at Çatalhöyük that date between AD 60 and 1650 ( n = 38). Across the dentition there are positive correlations between crown and cervical measurements, which tend to be higher in anterior teeth than in posterior teeth. Both measurements show low correlations with age; however, cervical measurements show fewer negative correlations with age. An intraobserver error study found low levels of error for both types of measurements. On a subset of the Çatalhöyük sample ( n = 9), a principal components and biological distance analysis were conducted comparing the two types of measurements. Also, all three samples were subject to a canonical discriminant function analysis and the results from cervical and crown measurements were compared. All analyses produced slightly different results for each type of data suggesting that crown and cervical measurements capture different aspects of tooth shape. While cervical and crown measurements provide different statistical results, cervical measurements can provide information relevant to anthropological studies and may allow for larger datasets to be used by allowing the inclusion of teeth with modified crowns. Am J Phys Anthropol 149:299-306, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study of social groupings as it applied to the inhabitants of Çatalhöyük, a neolithic site in Turkey. It cites a belief by anthropologists that the inhabitants grouped themselves according to biological kinship, burying their relatives within their own houses. Recent findings as of 2011 have found, however, that a number of the dead grouped in the same houses were not biologically related. This reportedly suggests that either they did not group themselves according to kinship, or had different definitions of it.

Objectives: A fundamental assumption in biological anthropology is that living individuals will present with different growth than non‐survivors of the same population. The aim is to address the question of whether growth and development data of non‐survivors are reflective of the biological consequences of selective mortality and/or stress. Materials and Methods: The study compares dental development and skeletal growth collected from radiographic images of contemporary samples of living and deceased individuals from the United States (birth to 20 years) and South Africa (birth to 12 years). Further evaluation of deceased individuals is used to explore differential patterns among manners of death (MOD). Results: Results do not show any significant differences in skeletal growth or dental development between living and deceased individuals. However, in the South African deceased sample the youngest individuals exhibited substantially smaller diaphyseal lengths than the living sample, but by 2 years of age the differences were negligible. In the US sample, neither significant nor substantial differences were found in dental development or diaphyseal length according to MOD and age (>2 years of age), though some long bones in individuals <2 years of age did show significant differences. No significant differences were noted in diaphyseal length according to MOD and age in the SA sample. Discussion: The current findings refute the idea that contemporary deceased and living individuals would present with differential growth and development patterns through all of ontogeny as well as the assumptions linking short stature, poor environments, and MOD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives In the first issue of the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, E.A. Hooton noted the expression of Eskimoid characteristics in the Icelandic skull, one of which was mandibular torus. Our goal is to evaluate this trait in another North Atlantic population, the Greenlandic Norse. Materials and methods An investigation of mandibular torus was carried out on all Greenlandic Norse skeletons disinterred up to 1986 ( n = 109), along with comparative samples from Iceland ( n = 82), Norway ( n = 98), and Denmark ( n = 64). Torus expression was scored on a six grade scale with absence and five degrees of trait presence. Results Greenlanders and Icelanders show extraordinarily high frequencies (65-97%) and pronounced expressions of mandibular torus. More surprising was the almost complete absence of this trait in a Danish Viking sample (9%) and a significantly lower frequency in medieval Norwegians (48%). Discussion The dramatic expression of mandibular torus in the Greenlandic Norse and their contrast to related Scandinavian populations in Europe stimulated the collection of data from the literature and the database of Christy G. Turner II for 49,970 individuals in 335 populations. When plotted on a global scale, mandibular torus shows a strong clinal distribution with the highest frequencies in northern latitudes and the lowest frequencies around the equator. Although mandibular torus has some hereditary component, as indicated by family studies, the trait has a strong environmental component of variance. How factors of a northern environment, including climatic stress and dietary behavior, influence torus expression remains enigmatic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]