“…Although a wide variety of factors can affect long bone diaphyseal morphology (Pearson and Lieberman, 2004;Ruff et al, 2006a), mechanical loading, associated with different weightbearing activities, is a key influence on the relative strength, and hence, the diaphyseal area, of lower limb bones (Shaw and Stock, 2009;Rantalainen et al, 2010;Ruff and Larsen, 2014). Anthropologists have, therefore, used diaphyseal morphology as a basis to explore the activities, environment, and possible social organization of past populations Takahashi, 1982, 1984; Stock and Pheiffer, 2001;Holt, 2003;Stock and Pfeiffer, 2004;Ruff et al, 1984;Ruff et al, 2006b;Marchi et al, 2006;Charlson et al, 2007;Maggiano et al, 2008;Marchi, 2008;Sparacello et al, 2008;Stock et al, 2011;Larsen and Ruff, 2011;Trinkaus and Ruff, 2012;Shaw and Stock, 2013;Zaki et al, 2015; Stock and Macintosh, in press). As examples, the crosssectional shape and robusticity of the diaphysis of lower limb bones have been used to explain higher lower limb loading activities in populations of hunter-gatherers, compared to agriculture or industrial populations, as well as to elucidate possible division of labor among males and females within and across different populations (Ruff, 1987;Bridge, 1989;Nakatsukasa, 1990;Wescott, 2006;Marchi, 2008;Ruff and Larsen, 2014).…”