Re-evaluating traditional markers of stress in an archaeological sample from central California

Pilloud, Marin A.; Schwitalla, Al W.

doi:10.1016/j.jas.2020.105102

Cited by 12 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Attempts have been made to quantify a skeletal frailty index to explore levels of stress and health and survivorship (e.g., Marklein et al, 2016; Marklein & Crews, 2017); however, these require relatively complete skeletons and can still be an imperfect representation of past frailty. Paleodemographic analyses that incorporate various skeletal indicators of stress or disruptions to growth and development can also be used to assess frailty (e.g., DeWitte, 2014; Yaussy & DeWitte, 2018); however, given the complex etiology of these skeletal indicators, it can be difficult to interpret their meaning in the past (Pilloud & Schwitalla, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of subadult skeletal and dental development based on living and deceased samples

Stull

Corron

et al. 2020

American J Phys Anthropol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives A fundamental assumption in biological anthropology is that living individuals will present with different growth than non‐survivors of the same population. The aim is to address the question of whether growth and development data of non‐survivors are reflective of the biological consequences of selective mortality and/or stress. Materials and Methods The study compares dental development and skeletal growth collected from radiographic images of contemporary samples of living and deceased individuals from the United States (birth to 20 years) and South Africa (birth to 12 years). Further evaluation of deceased individuals is used to explore differential patterns among manners of death (MOD). Results Results do not show any significant differences in skeletal growth or dental development between living and deceased individuals. However, in the South African deceased sample the youngest individuals exhibited substantially smaller diaphyseal lengths than the living sample, but by 2 years of age the differences were negligible. In the US sample, neither significant nor substantial differences were found in dental development or diaphyseal length according to MOD and age (>2 years of age), though some long bones in individuals <2 years of age did show significant differences. No significant differences were noted in diaphyseal length according to MOD and age in the SA sample. Discussion The current findings refute the idea that contemporary deceased and living individuals would present with differential growth and development patterns through all of ontogeny as well as the assumptions linking short stature, poor environments, and MOD.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of subadult skeletal and dental development based on living and deceased samples

Stull

Corron

et al. 2020

American J Phys Anthropol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Taken alone, this result cannot indicate what effect, if any, is the result of variation between those groups with respect to age‐at‐death distributions, sex ratios, social status, temporal period, or other factors. The inability to analyze the associations of multiple variables efficiently and simultaneously is a concern given evidence from numerous studies that stress markers and other data of interest to bioarchaeologists vary according to variables such as age‐at‐death, sex, and social status (see, e.g., DeWitte, 2012; Garland, 2020; Grauer, 1993; Nakayama, 2016; Pilloud & Schwitalla, 2020; Yaussy, 2019).…”

Section: Research Design and Quantitative Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Comparisons of temporal sequences across vastly different regions have underscored the lack of directionality implied by popular writers such as Pinker (2011). For example, a detailed study of cranial trauma and fortifications among pre‐contact Andean groups from 8000 BCE to 1532 CE revealed considerable evidence of violence during the late Early Horizon (400 BCE–100 CE) and then again during the Late Intermediate Period (1000–1400 CE) with an apparent lull in between (Arkush & Tung, 2013; see also, Baten & Steckel, 2019; Pilloud & Schwitalla, 2020; Redfern, 2020; Robbins Schug, 2020; Torres‐Rouff, 2020). Bioarchaeological critiques, however, are largely limited to academic language and scholarly publications.…”

Section: Violencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Twenty‐first century bioarchaeology: Taking stock and moving forward

Buikstra

DeWitte

Baker

et al. 2022

American Journal of Biological Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents outcomes from a Workshop entitled “Bioarchaeology: Taking Stock and Moving Forward,” which was held at Arizona State University (ASU) on March 6–8, 2020. Funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the School of Human Evolution and Social Change (ASU), and the Center for Bioarchaeological Research (CBR, ASU), the Workshop's overall goal was to explore reasons why research proposals submitted by bioarchaeologists, both graduate students and established scholars, fared disproportionately poorly within recent NSF Anthropology Program competitions and to offer advice for increasing success. Therefore, this Workshop comprised 43 international scholars and four advanced graduate students with a history of successful grant acquisition, primarily from the United States. Ultimately, we focused on two related aims: (1) best practices for improving research designs and training and (2) evaluating topics of contemporary significance that reverberate through history and beyond as promising trajectories for bioarchaeological research. Among the former were contextual grounding, research question/hypothesis generation, statistical procedures appropriate for small samples and mixed qualitative/quantitative data, the salience of Bayesian methods, and training program content. Topical foci included ethics, social inequality, identity (including intersectionality), climate change, migration, violence, epidemic disease, adaptability/plasticity, the osteological paradox, and the developmental origins of health and disease. Given the profound changes required globally to address decolonization in the 21st century, this concern also entered many formal and informal discussions.

show abstract

“…Stress and its direct link to poor or good “health” has been problematized particularly following the osteological paradox (Edinborough & Rando, 2020; Lambert, 2009; Pilloud & Schwitalla, 2020; Wood et al, 1992). For example, Pilloud and Schwitalla (2020) show that biological responses to stress change through time and with different cultural practices. Therefore, carious lesions, AMTL, DEH, PNBF, PH, and CO, which reflect biological adaptive responses, were selected.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A community in transition: Analysis of health and well‐being in people living during and following aridification

Caine

Roberts

Kennet

2022

Intl J of Osteoarchaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper considers skeletal and dental lesions to assess the effects of aridification on two skeletal samples from the Bronze Age in what is now the United Arab Emirates (UAE), located on the eastern end of the Arabian Peninsula. This paper hypothesized that the sample from Qarn al‐Harf (QAH) Tomb 6 would show a greater prevalence of skeletal and dental lesions in comparison with that from QAH Tomb 5, because QAH Tomb 6 dates to a period of aridification when compared with the wetter Wadi Suq period (~2000 B.C.). The skeletal remains from two tombs from QAH cemetery are studied: one dated to the transition period from the Umm an‐Nar to Wadi Suq period (~2000 B.C.) (Tomb 6, n = 141) and one Wadi Suq period tomb (Tomb 5, n = 44; 2000–1600 B.C.). Skeletal and dental lesions, including carious lesions, antemortem tooth loss, dental enamel hypoplasia, periosteal new bone formation, cribra orbitalia, and porotic hyperostosis, were recorded and used to assess differential lived experience. Findings from the two tombs are compared with five contemporary sites of the Umm an‐Nar and Wadi Suq periods. Fisher's exact tests found more statistically significant differences in the prevalence of cribra orbitalia (p = 0.0050) and non‐adult mortality (p = 0.0118) for the QAH Tomb 6 skeletal sample than that from QAH Tomb 5. No other skeletal or dental lesions were significantly different according to Fisher's exact tests. While not significant, periosteal new bone formation rates in QAH 6 in conjunction with cribra orbitalia rates suggest individuals were experiencing stressors that were not impacting QAH Tomb 5 individuals. Skeletal and dental lesion rates are not directly attributable to climate change; however, we argue that intense aridification around 2000 B.C. caused desiccated crops and an increased reliance on marine sources for QAH Tomb 6. This reliance likely promoted nutritionally deficient diets manifesting as observed higher rates of cribra orbitalia and periosteal new bone formation.

show abstract

Re-evaluating traditional markers of stress in an archaeological sample from central California

Cited by 12 publications

References 69 publications

A comparison of subadult skeletal and dental development based on living and deceased samples

A comparison of subadult skeletal and dental development based on living and deceased samples

Twenty‐first century bioarchaeology: Taking stock and moving forward

A community in transition: Analysis of health and well‐being in people living during and following aridification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About