One of the four pillars of the anthropological protocol is the estimation of sex. The protocol generally consists of linear metric analysis or visually assessing individual skeletal traits on the skull and pelvis based on an ordinal scale of 1-5, ranging from very masculine to very feminine. The morphologic traits are then some how averaged by the investigator to estimate sex. Some skulls may be misclassified because of apparent morphologic features that appear more or less robust due to size differences among individuals. The question of misclassification may be further exemplified in light of comparisons across populations that may differ not only in cranial robusticity but also in stature and general physique. The purpose of this study is to further examine the effect of size and sex on craniofacial shape among American populations to better understand the allometric foundation of skeletal traits currently used for sex estimation. Three-dimensional coordinates of 16 standard craniofacial landmarks were collected using a Microscribe-3DX digitizer. Data were collected for 118 American White and Black males and females from the W.M. Bass Donated Collection and the Forensic Data Bank. The MANCOVA procedure tested shape differences as a function of sex and size. Sex had a significant influence on shape for both American Whites (F = 2.90; d.f. = 19, 39; p > F = 0.0024) and Blacks (F = 2.81; d.f. = 19, 37; p > F = 0.0035), whereas size did not have a significant influence on shape in either Whites (F = 1.69; d.f. = 19, 39; p > F = 0.08) or Blacks (F = 1.09; d.f. = 19, 37; p > F = 0.40). Therefore, for each sex, individuals of various sizes were statistically the same shape. In other words, while significant differences were present between the size of males and females (males on average were larger), there was no size effect beyond that accounted for by sex differences in size. Moreover, the consistency between American groups is interesting as it suggests that population differences in sexual dimorphism may result more from human variation in size than allometric variation in craniofacial morphology.

Numerous studies have addressed sex estimation from the hands and feet with varying results. These studies have utilized multiple measurements to determine sex from the hands and feet, including measures of robusticity (e.g., base width and midshaft diameter). However, robusticity measurements are affected by activity, which can disguise underlying patterns of sexual dimorphism. The purpose of this study is to investigate the utility of length measurements of the hands and feet to estimate sex. The sample consists of white females (n=123) and males (n=136) from the Terry Collection. Discriminant function analysis was used to classify individuals by sex. The left hand outperformed both the right hand and foot producing correct classification rates exceeding 80%. Surprisingly, the phalanges were better sex discriminators than either the metacarpals or metatarsals. This study suggests that length measures are more appropriate than robusticity measures for sex estimation.

To date, numerous studies have examined the range of cranial thickness variation in modern humans. The purpose of this investigation is to present a new method that would be easier to replicate, and to examine sex and age variation in cranial thickness in a white sample. The method consists of excising four cranial segments from the frontal and parietal regions. The sample consists of 165 specimens collected at autopsy and 15 calvarial specimens. An increase in cranial thickness with age was observed. The results suggest that cranial thickness is not sexually dimorphic outside the onset of hyperostosis frontalis interna (HFI).

This study evaluates issues of precision, repeatability, and validation in three-dimensional (3D) landmark coordinates. Two observers collected 19 homologous cranial landmarks from three skulls during three separate digitizing sessions. Statistical analysis was conducted on the 171 interlandmark distances (ILDs) derived from the original coordinate data. A mixed model ANOVA detected significant within-subject error in 54 of the 171 ILDs (i.e., 32%). A GLM procedure revealed significant between-observer variation in 14 ILDs and significant observer-by-session differences in 13 ILDs. The majority of these differences involved ILDs with type 3 landmarks as endpoints, such as euryon and alare. Unlike type 1 and 2 landmarks which are biologically informative in all directions, type 3 landmarks contain a substantial arbitrary component. Thus, it is not surprising type 3 landmarks displayed significant digitizing error. Given these results, we caution researchers to be mindful of type 3 landmarks measurement discrepancies when selecting landmarks for coordinate data evaluation.

Recent studies of secular change and allometry have observed differential limb proportions between the sexes, among and within populations. These studies suggest that stature prediction formulae developed from American Whites may be inappropriate for European populations. The purpose of this investigation is to present more appropriate stature prediction equations for use in the Balkans to aid present-day identifications of the victims of genocide. The reference sample totals 545 white males obtained from World War II data. The Eastern European sample totals 177 males and includes both Bosnian and Croatian victims of the recent war. Mean stature for Eastern Europeans was obtained from the literature. Results show that formulae based on Trotter and Gleser systematically underestimate stature in the Balkans. Because Eastern Europeans are taller than American Whites it is appropriate to use this as an “informative prior” that can be applied to future cases. This informative prior can be used in predictive formulae, since it is probably similar to the sample from which the Balkan forensic cases were drawn. Based on Bayes' Theorem new predictive stature formulae are presented for Eastern Europeans.

Identification criteria, specifically discriminant function formulae derived from traditional craniometrics, currently used in South Florida for Cuban Americans and other “Hispanic” groups, are unsuitable to provide adequate biological profiles due to complex biological histories as well as widely diverse geographic origins. Florida's total population is approximately 16 million (15,982,378) individuals. Of the total population 2,682,715, or 16.8%, are self-identified as “Hispanic”. South Florida (herein defined as Miami-Dade, Broward and Collier Counties) is home to 60% of the total Hispanic population of Florida with 1,291,737 (48.15%) residing in Miami-Dade County. The Hispanic population of Miami-Dade County makes up 57.0% of the total population of 2,253,362. Each recognized sub-group of Hispanics (Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban) includes its own geographic point-of-origin and population history. Cuban-Americans (arriving in the late 1950's and early 1960's) make up the largest sub-population of Florida's Hispanics in any county and in Miami-Dade number 650,601 or 51% of the total Latin population. Additionally, as in other agricultural states, Florida has a very large population of undocumented workers who primarily arrive from Texas and points south of the Straits of Florida. Thus the application of the available traditional craniometric and non-metric methods are not appropriate for South Florida's Latin population. To begin to address this issue in relation to South Florida's Cuban population, we present an analysis of cranio-facial shape variation in a 19th Century Cuban sample, 17th Century Spanish sample, a Precontact Cuban sample, and Terry Blacks using geometric morphometric methods. Significant biological shape differences and patterns of variation are observed among the groups. These results provide us with a context in which to begin to understand the biological variation of Cuban Americans, which will enable the development of identification criteria specific for this U.S. hybrid Hispanic community.

Sex determination of the human skeleton is best assessed from the os coxa. The present study explored the possibility of using three-dimensional landmark coordinate data collected from various landmarks located over the entire bone to determine whether there were significant sex differences local to the landmarks. Thirty-six landmarks were digitized on 200 African American and European American male and female adult human os coxae. MANCOVA results show that sex and size have a significant effect on shape for both European Americans (Sex, F = 17.50, d.f. = 36, 63, p > F = 0.0001; Size, F = 2.56, d.f. = 36, 63, p > F = 0.0022) and African Americans (Sex, F = 21.18, d.f. = 36, 63, p > F = 0.0001; Size, F = 2.59, d.f. = 36, 63, p > F = 0.0005). The discriminant analysis shows that sexing accuracy for European Americans is 98% for both males and females, 98% for African American females, and 100% for African American males.

One of the parameters forensic anthropologists have traditionally estimated is ancestry, which is used in the United States as a proxy for social race. Its use is controversial because the biological race concept was debunked by scientists decades ago. However, many forensic anthropologists contend, in part, that because social race categories used by law enforcement can be predicted by cranial variation, ancestry remains a necessary parameter for estimation. Here, we use content analysis of the Journal of Forensic Sciences for the period 2009–2019 to demonstrate the use of various nomenclature and resultant confusion in ancestry estimation studies, and as a mechanism to discuss how forensic anthropologists have eschewed a human variation approach to studying human morphological differences in favor of a simplistic and debunked typological one. Further, we employ modern geometric morphometric and spatial analysis methods on craniofacial coordinate anatomical landmarks from several Latin American samples to test the validity of applying the antiquated tri-continental approach to ancestry (i.e., African, Asian, European). Our results indicate groups are not patterned by the ancestry trifecta. These findings illustrate the benefit and necessity of embracing studies that employ population structure models to better understand human variation and the historical factors that have influenced it.