Search

ABSTRACT In 1965, Ciur-Izbuc Cave in the Carpathian Mountains of Romania was discovered to contain about 400 ancient human footprints. At that time, researchers interpreted the footprints to be those of a man, woman and child who entered the cave by an opening which is now blocked but which was usable in antiquity. The age of the prints (≈10-15 ka BP) was based partly on their association with cave bear ( Ursus spelaeus) footprints and bones, and the belief that cave bears became extinct near the end of the last ice age. Since their discovery, the human and bear evidence and the cave itself have attracted spelunkers and other tourists, with the result that the ancient footprints are in danger of destruction by modern humans. In an effort to conserve the footprints and information about them and to reanalyze them with modern techiques, Ciur-Izbuc Cave was restudied in summer of 2012. Modern results are based on fewer than 25% of the originally described human footprints, the rest having been destroyed. It is impossible to confirm some of the original conclusions. The footprints do not cluster about three different sizes, and the number of individuals is estimated to be six or seven. Two cases of bears apparently overprinting humans help establish antiquity, and C-14 dates suggest a much greater age than originally thought. Unfortunately, insufficient footprints remain to measure movement variables such as stride length. However, detailed three-dimensional mapping of the footprints does allow a more precise description of human movements within the cave. Am J Phys Anthropol 155:128-135, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT This study focuses on the age adjustment of statures estimated with the anatomical method. The research material includes 127 individuals from the Terry Collection. The cadaveric stature (CSTA)-skeletal height (SKH) ratios indicate that stature loss with age commences before SKH reduction. Testing three equations to estimate CSTA at the age at death and CSTA corrected to maximum stature from SKH indicates that the age correction of stature should reflect the pattern of age-related stature loss to minimize estimation error. An equation that includes a continuous and linear age correction through the entire adult age range [Eq. (1)] results in curvilinear stature estimation error. This curvilinear stature estimation error can be largely avoided by applying a second linear equation [Eq. (2)] to only individuals older than 40 years. Our third equation [Eq. (3)], based on younger individuals who have not lost stature, can be used to estimate maximum stature. This equation can also be applied to individuals of unknown or highly uncertain age, because it provides reasonably accurate estimates until about 60/70 years at least for males. Am J Phys Anthropol 152:96-106, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Body size (stature and mass) estimates are integral to understanding the lifeways of past populations. Body size estimation of an archaeological skeletal sample can be problematic when the body size or proportions of the population are distinctive. One such population is that of the Holocene Later Stone Age (LSA) of southern Africa, in which small stature (mean femoral length = 407 mm, n = 52) and narrow pelves (mean bi-iliac breadth = 210 mm, n = 50) produce a distinctive adult body size/shape, making it difficult to identify appropriate body size estimation methods. Material culture, morphology, and culture history link the Later Stone Age people with the descendant population collectively known as the Khoe-San. Stature estimates based on skeletal "anatomical" linear measures (the Fully method) and on long bone length are compared, along with body mass estimates derived from "morphometric" (bi-iliac breath/stature) and "biomechanical" (femoral head diameter) methods, in a LSA adult skeletal sample (n = 52) from the from coastal and near-coastal regions of South Africa. Indices of sexual dimorphism (ISD) for each method are compared with data from living populations. Fully anatomical stature is most congruent with Olivier's femur + tibia method, although both produce low ISD. McHenry's femoral head body mass formula produces estimates most consistent with the bi-iliac breadth/stature method for the females, although the males display higher degrees of disagreement among methods. These results highlight the need for formulae derived from reference samples from a wider range of body sizes to improve the reliability of existing methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which aim is to create new stature regression formulae based on anatomical reconstruction of stature in ancient Egyptians and to analyze their accuracy in comparison to other methods of stature estimation. With the use of revised Fully anatomical method, living stature estimates were derived from American Blacks and Whites. It concludes that blacks and Egyptians are not identical although ancient Egyptians are closer in body proportion to modern American Blacks.

The ‘anatomical’ method of Fully ([19561 Ann. Legale Med. 35:266-273) for reconstructing stature, involving the addition of skeletal elements from the calcaneus to the skull, has been increasingly used in anthropological and forensic contexts, but has undergone little systematic testing on samples other than the original sample used to develop the technique. The original description by Fully of the method also does not provide completely explicit directions for taking all of the necessary measurements. This study tested the accuracy and applicability of his method, and clarified measurement procedures. The study sample consisted of 119 adult black and white males and females of known cadaveric statures from the Terry Collection. Cadaveric statures were adjusted to living statures, following the recommendations of Trotter and Gleser ([19521 Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 10:469-514). We obtained the best results using maximum vertebral body heights (anterior to the pedicles) and measurement of the articulated talus and calcaneus height in anatomical position. Statures derived using the original Fully technique are strongly correlated with living statures in our sample (r = 0.96), but underestimate living stature by an average of about 2.4 cm. Anatomical considerations also suggest that the correction factors applied by Fully to convert summed skeletal height to living stature are too small. New formulae are derived to calculate living stature from skeletal height. There is no effect of sex or ancestry on stature prediction. Resulting stature estimates are accurate to within 4.5 cm in 95% of the individuals in our sample, with no directional bias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stature (height) is an important factor in establishing the identity of a person in the living as well as in the skeletonized state. When stature is estimated from the bones of the limbs, regression equations, which estimate the ratios of the lengths of bones to the height of the individual, are generated. The majority of bones that were used previously were the long bones. The calcaneus was used for estimating stature only in American whites and blacks (Holland [1995] Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 96:315–320). The regression equations that he generated were found to be useful for stature estimation in these population groups. Since the calcaneus has not been used for the same purpose in South Africa, the aim of this study was to derive regression equations that will allow this bone to be used for stature estimation in South African blacks. In total, 116 complete skeletons (60 males and 56 females) were selected from the Raymond A. Dart Collection of Human Skeletons, School of Anatomical Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand (Johannesburg, South Africa). The skeletal heights of these sets of skeletons were calculated using the anatomical method of Fully ([1956] Ann. Med. Leg. 35:266-273). Nine parameters of the calcaneus were measured and matched against skeletal heights, using univariate and multivariate regression methods. Regression equations were obtained for estimation of the stature of the South African black population from the calcaneus. The standard error of estimate that was obtained with univariate regression analysis was higher than the corresponding values using multivariate regression analysis. In both cases, the standard errors of estimate compared well with the values obtained for fragmentary long bones by previous authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the past, body mass was reconstructed from hominin skeletal remains using both "mechanical" methods which rely on the support of body mass by weight-bearing skeletal elements, and "morphometric" methods which reconstruct body mass through direct assessment of body size and shape. A previous comparison of two such techniques, using femoral head breadth (mechanical) and stature and bi-iliac breadth (morphometric), indicated a good general correspondence between them (Ruff et al. [1997] Nature 387:173-176). However, the two techniques were never systematically compared across a large group of modern humans of diverse body form. This study incorporates skeletal measures taken from 1,173 Holocene adult individuals, representing diverse geographic origins, body sizes, and body shapes. Femoral head breadth, bi-iliac breadth (after pelvic rearticulation), and long bone lengths were measured on each individual. Statures were estimated from long bone lengths using appropriate reference samples. Body masses were calculated using three available femoral head breadth (FH) formulae and the stature/bi-iliac breadth (STBIB) formula, and compared. All methods yielded similar results. Correlations between FH estimates and STBIB estimates are 0.74-0.81. Slight differences in results between the three FH estimates can be attributed to sampling differences in the original reference samples, and in particular, the body-size ranges included in those samples. There is no evidence for systematic differences in results due to differences in body proportions. Since the STBIB method was validated on other samples, and the FH methods produced similar estimates, this argues that either may be applied to skeletal remains with some confidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many applied problems in physical anthropology involve estimation of an unobservable quantity (such as age at death or stature) from quantities that are observable. Two of the more disparate subdisciplines of our discipline, paleoanthropology and forensic anthropology, routinely make use of various estimation methods on a case-by-case basis. We discuss the rationales for making estimations on isolated cases, taking stature estimation from femoral and humerus lengths as an example. We show that the entirety of our discussion can be placed within the context of calibration problems, where a large calibration sample is used to estimate an unobservable quantity for a single skeleton. Taking a calibration approach to the problem highlights the essentially Bayesian versus maximum likelihood nature of the question of stature estimation. On the basis of both theoretical arguments and practical examples, we show that inverse calibration (regression of stature on bone length) is generally preferred when the stature distribution for a reference sample forms a reasonable prior, while classical calibration (regression of bone length on stature followed by solving for stature) is preferred when there is reason to suspect that the estimated stature will be an extrapolation beyond the useful limits of the reference sample statures. The choice between these two approaches amounts to the decision to use either a Bayesian or a maximum likelihood method. Yrbk Phys Anthropol 41:65-92, 1998. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]