A Geometric Morphometric Approach to Sex Determination of the Human Adult Os Coxa

Abstract

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.

An Investigation into the Relationship between Human Cranial and Pelvic Sexual Dimorphism

“…These results are similar to those presented by Bytheway and Ross , who obtained 98% to 100% correct sex classification rates using geometric morphometric analyses of os coxae landmarks from samples of European Americans and African Americans. They also report significant sex differences in centroid size and suggest that size may influence os coxae shape, but do not attempt sex classifications based on size variables.…”

“…Cranial and pelvic landmarks collected. Cranial black dots indicate landmarks defined by Jantz and Ousley , os coxae black dots are landmarks defined by Bytheway and Ross , the black diamond reflects a landmark slightly modified from Byetheway and Ross , light gray squares are landmarks defined by Klales et al , and dark gray triangles represent novel landmarks defined in this study.…”

A geometric morphometric analysis of acetabular shape of the primate hip joint in relation to locomotor behaviour

“…Morphometrics is the study of shape variation and its covariation with other variables (Bookstein, 1991;Dryden and Mardia, 1998), where "shape" describes the geometric properties of an object that are invariant to location, scale, and orientation (Slice, 2005). The use of landmark-based GM has increased rapidly in the anthropological sciences in recent years (e.g., Bruner, 2004;Mitteroecker et al, 2005;Oettle et al, 2005;Bastir et al, 2006;Martin on-Torres et al, 2006;Perez et al, 2006;Kimmerle et al, 2007;Bigoni et al, 2010;Bytheway and Ross, 2010;Neubauer et al, 2010;Coquerelle et al, 2011;Arias-Martorell et al, 2012;Harvati and Hublin, 2012;Lycett and von Cramon-Taubadel, 2013). However, large areas of many biological objects, such as joint surfaces like the acetabulum (Niewoehner, 2005), have few or no identifiable landmarks and their structural information is represented only by surfaces, curves, or outlines, which have for some time limited the implementation of GM methods for their study (Oxnard, 1978).…”

Determining sex by bone volume from 3D images: discriminating analysis of the tali and radii in a contemporary Spanish reference collection

“…Also important are the studies which include new methodologies to evaluate the discriminant power of certain bones and regions; methods based on digital radiometric studies [23], lateral cephalometric studies [24], or morphometric analysis of digital photographs [25]. In terms of the specific analytical studies on sexual dimorphism using 3D imaging, one of the most noteworthy is the work by Sholts et al (2010) completed on craniums [26], while on the postcranial skeleton the most notable are the studies based on geometric morphometrics [27,28]. In accordance with these last lines of research based on 3D imaging and due to the lack of studies which quantify the discriminant power of bone volume in determining sex on the basis of bones in the postcranial skeleton, a first study on the talus and radius bones was performed by calculating their volume in a sample taken from a contemporary Spanish reference collection (twentieth century) (EML 1).…”