Osteometric Sorting of Commingled Human Remains

Abstract

This paper describes the method of osteometric sorting. Osteometric sorting is the formal use of size and shape to sort bones from one another. The method relies heavily on measurement data and statistical models and is designed to maximize objectivity. The goal of this paper is to validate the use of osteometric sorting and to provide case examples of its utility. Selected regression models are also presented for use with osteometric sorting. We advocate this technique as one tool among many in the anthropologist's toolkit for sorting commingled skeletal remains.

Osteometric Sorting

“…the sorting process is documented and can (in principle) be replicated by other anthropologists (Adams and Byrd 2006;Byrd and Adams 2003).…”

“…This isometric reality is exploited in the sorting process by formally comparing the sizes of two bones. Byrd and Adams (2003) have proposed that we test the statistical null hypothesis that the two specimens are of a size to have originated in the same individual. The original proposal relied on the use of prediction intervals, following the Neyman-Pearson approach to hypothesis testing (c.f.…”

Simple algorithms for the estimation of the initial number of individuals in commingled skeletal remains

“…Methods of osteometric sorting for human commingled skeletal remains have also been developed and are based on the null hypothesis that two bone specimens of consistent sizes should have originated from the same individual (Byrd and Adams, 2003). Among the elements that have been used are the cervical vertebrae (Buikstra et al, 1984), the femoral head and acetabulum (London and Curran, 1986;London and Hunt, 1998), combinations of long bone and cranial dimensions (Rösing and Pischtschan, 1995), or solely long bone dimensions (Byrd and Adams, 2003).…”

“…Among the elements that have been used are the cervical vertebrae (Buikstra et al, 1984), the femoral head and acetabulum (London and Curran, 1986;London and Hunt, 1998), combinations of long bone and cranial dimensions (Rösing and Pischtschan, 1995), or solely long bone dimensions (Byrd and Adams, 2003).…”

Spatial Analysis of Mass Grave Mapping Data to Assist in the Reassociation of Disarticulated and Commingled Human Remains

“…When considering possible solutions to the problem of sorting commingled human remains from a mass grave context, one is inclined to think of methods conducted within a laboratory setting (Dirkmaat et al 2005), such as physical pair-matching of skeletal elements, evaluating articulation of elements, statistical analysis of measurements taken from the elements, or other such techniques that use data generated during mortuary analysis (Buikstra et al 1984;Byrd and Adams 2003); in short, techniques that focus on the remains well after they have been recovered from the grave. Data generated during the excavation of a mass grave unfortunately are not often consulted when attempting to tackle problems of commingling.…”