Human Bioarchaeology of the Transition to Agriculture 2011
DOI: 10.1002/9780470670170.ch12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

‘An External Agency of Considerable Importance’: The Stresses of Agriculture in the Foraging‐to‐Farming Transition in Eastern North America

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
4
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…While joint surfaces primarily adapt to the mechanical loads imposed by body size, cross‐sectional dimensions adapt to withstand habitual loads imposed by both body size and activity (Lieberman, Polk, & Demes, 2004; Ruff, 2000). Most studies have used diaphyseal cross‐sectional properties to reconstruct behavior (Bridges, 1989; Holt, 2003; Larsen & Ruff, 2011; Lieverse, Stock, Katzenberg, & Haverkort, 2011; Macintosh et al, 2014, 2017a; Marchi, Sparacello, Holt, & Formicola, 2006; May & Ruff, 2016; Ruff & Larsen, 2014; Sparacello & Marchi, 2008; Stock et al, 2011; Stock & Pfeiffer, 2004). Lower limb shape and strength have primarily been used to identify differences in levels of terrestrial mobility, because bipedal locomotion creates greater loads in the anteroposterior than the mediolateral plane (Holt, 2003; Lieverse et al, 2011; Marchi et al, 2006; Shaw & Stock, 2009, 2013; Sparacello & Marchi, 2008; Stock & Pfeiffer, 2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While joint surfaces primarily adapt to the mechanical loads imposed by body size, cross‐sectional dimensions adapt to withstand habitual loads imposed by both body size and activity (Lieberman, Polk, & Demes, 2004; Ruff, 2000). Most studies have used diaphyseal cross‐sectional properties to reconstruct behavior (Bridges, 1989; Holt, 2003; Larsen & Ruff, 2011; Lieverse, Stock, Katzenberg, & Haverkort, 2011; Macintosh et al, 2014, 2017a; Marchi, Sparacello, Holt, & Formicola, 2006; May & Ruff, 2016; Ruff & Larsen, 2014; Sparacello & Marchi, 2008; Stock et al, 2011; Stock & Pfeiffer, 2004). Lower limb shape and strength have primarily been used to identify differences in levels of terrestrial mobility, because bipedal locomotion creates greater loads in the anteroposterior than the mediolateral plane (Holt, 2003; Lieverse et al, 2011; Marchi et al, 2006; Shaw & Stock, 2009, 2013; Sparacello & Marchi, 2008; Stock & Pfeiffer, 2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…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).…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The understanding of physical activity in hunter‐gatherers' health represents one of the major issues in bioarchaeological and paleopathological research since at least the 1980s. The results mainly show higher mechanical loadings, body size and sexual dimorphism in hunter‐gatherers than in agriculturalist and industrial societies, changes that are attributed to differences in social practices and mobility (e.g., Larsen & Ruff, 2011; Ruff, 2008). These investigations also suggest that the high mobility of hunter‐gatherers strongly increased the development of joint diseases (Kennedy, 1989; Molnar, Ahlstrom, & Leden, 2011; Ponce, 2010; Weiss, Corona, & Schultz, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%