Pelvic dimorphism in relation to body size and body size dimorphism in humans

Kurki, Helen K.

doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.07.006

Cited by 100 publications

(128 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In modern humans, for example, pelvic breadth is related to climate in the same manner in males and females [13], but a number of features of the female bony pelvis increase the size of the birth canal relative to males [78]. Unfortunately, the fossil record of the hominin pelvis is so sparse that it is usually impossible to make comparisons between male and female anatomy for any particular species [17,36,79]. In fact, because evolution has produced in fossil hominin pelvises 'a combination of traits in an extinct animal that is duplicated by no living creature' [80, p. 110], it is often very difficult even to assign a sex to any given fossil [2,33,36,81 -83].…”

Section: Pelvic Evolution In Early (Non-homo) Homininsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The relationship between body size and shape, overall pelvic size and shape, and birth canal size and shape in modern humans is complex [3,15,17,18,79,[138][139][140][141]. With the evolution of the modern pelvis, the size of the birth canal was essentially decoupled from the size of the body: birth canal proportions in modern humans do not necessarily correlate with body proportions [138,141,142].…”

Section: The Evolution Of the Modern Human Pelvismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the nature and extent of sexual dimorphism in the modern pelvis are particularly complex, and a large number of studies have produced no clear indication that obstetric constraints produced between-sex differences in variability [3,18,138,139,[141][142][143]. To further complicate matters, work by Betti and co-workers [3,18,141] has suggested that among modern humans, neutral evolutionary processes reflecting demographic history have also been important in determining variation in pelvic form (see also [17]). …”

Section: The Evolution Of the Modern Human Pelvismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These goals are not all achieved by the same pelvic morphology, yet all three demands must be met. Therefore, selection has favoured compromises between these often contradictory pressures [15][16][17] 1 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The evolution of the human pelvis: changing adaptations to bipedalism, obstetrics and thermoregulation

Gruss

Schmitt

2015

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fossil record of the human pelvis reveals the selective priorities acting on hominin anatomy at different points in our evolutionary history, during which mechanical requirements for locomotion, childbirth and thermoregulation often conflicted. In our earliest upright ancestors, fundamental alterations of the pelvis compared with non-human primates facilitated bipedal walking. Further changes early in hominin evolution produced a platypelloid birth canal in a pelvis that was wide overall, with flaring ilia. This pelvic form was maintained over 3-4 Myr with only moderate changes in response to greater habitat diversity, changes in locomotor behaviour and increases in brain size. It was not until Homo sapiens evolved in Africa and the Middle East 200 000 years ago that the narrow anatomically modern pelvis with a more circular birth canal emerged. This major change appears to reflect selective pressures for further increases in neonatal brain size and for a narrow body shape associated with heat dissipation in warm environments. The advent of the modern birth canal, the shape and alignment of which require fetal rotation during birth, allowed the earliest members of our species to deal obstetrically with increases in encephalization while maintaining a narrow body to meet thermoregulatory demands and enhance locomotor performance.

show abstract

Section: Pelvic Evolution In Early (Non-homo) Homininsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Evolution Of the Modern Human Pelvismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Evolution Of the Modern Human Pelvismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The evolution of the human pelvis: changing adaptations to bipedalism, obstetrics and thermoregulation

Gruss

Schmitt

2015

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sexual dimorphism is well documented for the pelvis in both humans and the nonhuman apes with females having larger relative and/or absolute pelvic dimensions related to overall body size [10,16]. The absence of sex differences in proximal femoral morphology in the nonhuman apes suggests sex hormones do not play an important role in their hip ontogeny, whereas they likely do in pelvic ontogeny [16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Ape Proximal Femora Tell Us About Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Comparison

Fikkers

Bouma

Boer

et al. 2015

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Human hip morphology is variable, and some variations (or hip morphotypes) such as coxa profunda and coxa recta (cam-type hip) are associated with femoroacetabular impingement and the development of osteoarthrosis. Currently, however, this variability is unexplained. A broader perspective with background information on the morphology of the proximal femur of nonhuman apes is lacking. Specifically, no studies exist of nonhuman ape femora that quantify concavity and its variability. Questions/purposes We hypothesized that, when compared with modern humans, the nonhuman apes would show (1) greater proximal femoral concavity; (2) less variability in concavity; and (3) less sexual dimorphism in proximal femoral morphology. Methods Using identical methods, we compared 10 morphological parameters in 375 human femora that are part of the Hamann-Todd collection at the Cleveland Museum of Natural History with 210 nonhuman ape femora that are part of the collection of the Royal Museum for Central Africa, Tervuren, Belgium, and the Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France. Results The nonhuman apes have larger proximal femoral concavity than modern humans. This morphology is almost uniform without large variability or large differences neither between species nor between sexes. Conclusions Variability is seen in human but not in nonhuman ape proximal femoral morphology. An evolutionary explanation can be that proximal femoral concavity is more important for the nonhuman apes, for example for climbing, than for modern humans, where a lack of concavity may be related to high loading of the hip, for example in running.

show abstract

Skeletal variability in the pelvis and limb skeleton of humans: Does stabilizing selection limit female pelvic variation?

Kurki

2013

American J Hum Biol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Pelvic dimorphism in relation to body size and body size dimorphism in humans

Cited by 100 publications

References 80 publications

The evolution of the human pelvis: changing adaptations to bipedalism, obstetrics and thermoregulation

The evolution of the human pelvis: changing adaptations to bipedalism, obstetrics and thermoregulation

What Ape Proximal Femora Tell Us About Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Comparison

Skeletal variability in the pelvis and limb skeleton of humans: Does stabilizing selection limit female pelvic variation?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About