Assessing the application of tooth cementum annulation relative to macroscopic aging techniques in an archeological sample

Gauthier, J.; Schutkowski, Holger

doi:10.1016/j.jchb.2012.11.001

Cited by 21 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Gocha and colleagues (2015) found that using different auricular surface methods alongside the Suchey-Brooks (Brooks and Suchey 1990) pubic symphysis method provided the most accurate results; they recommended using age estimates from Osborne et al (2004) for individuals with a pubic symphysis in stages I to IV, but the Buckberry-Chamberlain (2002) auricular surface method for individuals with a Suchey-Brooks phase V or VI. Dental wear cannot reliably estimate the age of older adults; in one study, for individuals with dental wear ages of 45+, emphasis was placed on age estimates provided by the pubic symphysis and auricular surface (Gauthier and Schutkowski 2013). Of course a systematic selective approach to combining age estimates assumes that the same age indicators are available for all individuals, which is often not the case due to taphonomic damage (Gauthier and Schutkowski 2013;Kemkes-Grottenthaler 2001;Naji et al early view;Wittwer-Backofen et al 2008), and is much easier when there is a broad level of agreement between different age estimates (Milner and Boldsen 2012).…”

Section: Combining and Presenting Age Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dental wear cannot reliably estimate the age of older adults; in one study, for individuals with dental wear ages of 45+, emphasis was placed on age estimates provided by the pubic symphysis and auricular surface (Gauthier and Schutkowski 2013). Of course a systematic selective approach to combining age estimates assumes that the same age indicators are available for all individuals, which is often not the case due to taphonomic damage (Gauthier and Schutkowski 2013;Kemkes-Grottenthaler 2001;Naji et al early view;Wittwer-Backofen et al 2008), and is much easier when there is a broad level of agreement between different age estimates (Milner and Boldsen 2012).…”

Section: Combining and Presenting Age Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Once skeletal maturity has been reached, age is typically estimated using degenerative changes of the skeleton, dental wear and (less frequently) microscopic analysis of bone and cementum. All of these, except tooth cementum annulations, have only a broad relationship with chronological age (Gauthier and Schutkowski 2013;Grosskopf and McGlynn 2011;Naji et al early view;Wittwer-Backofen et al 2004). Most skeletal indicators of adult age have been shown to vary between individuals and between populations, reflecting the complexity of the ageing process and the myriad of factors that may influence it (see Mays, this volume and Jackes 2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The (mis)use of adult age estimates in osteology

Buckberry

2015

Annals of Human Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Adult age-at-death is presented in a number of different ways by anthropologists. Ordinal categories predominate in osteoarchaeology, but do not reflect individual variation in ageing, with too many adults being classified as 'middle adults'. In addition, mean ages (derived from reference samples) are overly-relied upon when developing and testing methods. In both cases, 'age mimicry' is not adequately accounted for.Objectives: To highlight the many inherent biases created when developing, testing and applying age-estimation methods without fully considering the impact of 'age mimicry' and individual variation.Methods: The paper draws on previously published research (Web of Science, Pub Med, Google Scholar) on age estimation methods and their use in anthropology.Results and Conclusions: There is a lack of consistency in the methods used to estimate age, and for the mode of combining them. Ordinal categories are frequently used in osteoarchaeology, whereas forensic anthropologists are more likely to produce case-specific age ranges. Mean ages reflect the age structure of reference samples, and should not be used to estimate age for individuals from populations with a different age-at-death structure. Individual-specific age ranges and/or probability densities should be used to report individual age. Further research should be undertaken on how to create unbiased, combined method age estimates. 2Age estimation of adults remains one of the most complex, yet essential, aspects of human skeletal analysis (Aykroyd et al. 1997;Bocquet-Appel and Masset 1982; Hoppa and Vaupel 2002a;Konigsberg and Frankenberg 1992;Milner et al. 2008). In a society ruled by numbers, we are eager to ascribe a specific age to skeletonised remains, either to facilitate the identification of unidentified remains in a forensic situation, or to better interpret the life, death and burial of archaeological humans. Yet many methods of age estimation, especially for adults but also for non-adults, are woefully inadequate at producing point age estimates. Over the last few decades, research into the development, refinement and testing of adult age-estimation methods has expanded, resulting in a plethora of techniques, and variants of techniques, available for application, with the aim of improving accuracy and precision.Age estimation in non-adults, where dental and skeletal maturation are employed to estimate chronological age, typically produces estimates that are both accurate and precise. Dental development in particular has been shown to be minimally affected by external factors such as disease or malnutrition (Elamin and Liversidge 2013) and thus less variation in age for a specific stage of development. Once skeletal maturity has been reached, age is typically estimated using degenerative changes of the skeleton, dental wear and (less frequently) microscopic analysis of bone and cementum. All of these, except tooth cementum annulations, have only a broad relationship with chronological age (Gauthier and Schutkowski 2013;Gro...

show abstract

Section: Combining and Presenting Age Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Combining and Presenting Age Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The (mis)use of adult age estimates in osteology

Buckberry

2015

Annals of Human Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also, methods of cementum striation counting can be applied to some Jomon specimens to calibrate the rate of ancient Jomon logitDVRrt increase, given that this method supposedly provides reference-free age estimations (thus, free of the matter of interpopulational difference), although its destructive nature prevents application to every specimen of our Jomon sample set (Gauthier & Schutkowski, 2013 An important finding of the present study is that the mortality pattern (represented by the two Gompertz parameters) of the Jomon, a prehistoric population, appears to have been similar to that observed among modern hunter-gatherers, and that it seems to have followed the parameter correlation empirically recognized from hunter-gatherers throughout modern/historic human populations (Figure 4). Also, methods of cementum striation counting can be applied to some Jomon specimens to calibrate the rate of ancient Jomon logitDVRrt increase, given that this method supposedly provides reference-free age estimations (thus, free of the matter of interpopulational difference), although its destructive nature prevents application to every specimen of our Jomon sample set (Gauthier & Schutkowski, 2013 An important finding of the present study is that the mortality pattern (represented by the two Gompertz parameters) of the Jomon, a prehistoric population, appears to have been similar to that observed among modern hunter-gatherers, and that it seems to have followed the parameter correlation empirically recognized from hunter-gatherers throughout modern/historic human populations (Figure 4).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maximum likelihood estimate of life expectancy in the prehistoric Jomon: Canine pulp volume reduction suggests a longer life expectancy than previously thought

Sasaki

Kondo

2016

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent theoretical progress potentially refutes past claims that paleodemographic estimations are flawed by statistical problems, including age mimicry and sample bias due to differential preservation. The life expectancy at age 15 of the Jomon period prehistoric populace in Japan was initially estimated to have been ∼16 years while a more recent analysis suggested 31.5 years. In this study, we provide alternative results based on a new methodology. The material comprises 234 mandibular canines from Jomon period skeletal remains and a reference sample of 363 mandibular canines of recent-modern Japanese. Dental pulp reduction is used as the age-indicator, which because of tooth durability is presumed to minimize the effect of differential preservation. Maximum likelihood estimation, which theoretically avoids age mimicry, was applied. Our methods also adjusted for the known pulp volume reduction rate among recent-modern Japanese to provide a better fit for observations in the Jomon period sample. Without adjustment for the known rate in pulp volume reduction, estimates of Jomon life expectancy at age 15 were dubiously long. However, when the rate was adjusted, the estimate results in a value that falls within the range of modern hunter-gatherers, with significantly better fit to the observations. The rate-adjusted result of 32.2 years more likely represents the true life expectancy of the Jomon people at age 15, than the result without adjustment. Considering ∼7% rate of antemortem loss of the mandibular canine observed in our Jomon period sample, actual life expectancy at age 15 may have been as high as ∼35.3 years.

show abstract

“…No staining technique was used since it is not essential to distinguish the lines after the section and polishing [ 39 ]. Observations were performed through an optical microscope with magnifications of ×100, ×200 and ×400 (Nikon Eclipse E600) and micrographs of areas with better visibility were taken with a coupled camera (Nikon DXM 1200C) using the Nikon ACT software.…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

The circles of life: age at death estimation in burnt teeth through tooth cementum annulations

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Age at death estimation in burnt human remains is problematic due to the severe heat-induced modifications that may affect the skeleton after a burning event. The objective of this paper was to assess if cementochronology, which focuses on the cementum incremental lines, is a reliable method of age estimation in burnt remains. Besides the classical approach based on the counting of incremental lines, another approach based on the extrapolation of incremental lines taking into account the cement layer thickness and the incremental line thickness was investigated. A comparison of the performance of the two techniques was carried out on a sample of 60 identified monoradicular teeth that were recently extracted at dentist offices and then experimentally burnt at two maximum temperatures (400 and 900 °C

show abstract

Assessing the application of tooth cementum annulation relative to macroscopic aging techniques in an archeological sample

Cited by 21 publications

References 44 publications

The (mis)use of adult age estimates in osteology

The (mis)use of adult age estimates in osteology

Maximum likelihood estimate of life expectancy in the prehistoric Jomon: Canine pulp volume reduction suggests a longer life expectancy than previously thought

The circles of life: age at death estimation in burnt teeth through tooth cementum annulations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About