Secular Change in Morphological Pelvic Traits used for Sex Estimation

Abstract

This research evaluates secular change in Phenice's (Am J Phys Anthropol, 30, 1969 and 297) three morphological traits of the pubis, as described by Klales et al. (Am J Phys Anthropol, 149, 2012 and 104): medial aspect of the ischio-pubic ramus, subpubic contour, and ventral arc. Ordinal scores were collected for these traits and compared between a sample of innominates from the historical Hamann-Todd Collection (n = 170) and modern Bass Donated Collection (n = 129). Using the Freeman-Halton test, significant differences between temporal sample score frequencies were found for all traits in females and for the subpubic contour and ventral arc in males. Despite these findings, classification accuracy using logistic regression between the temporal periods remained low (68.7%). These results suggest that secular changes in trait expression are occurring; however, sex estimation methods using these traits and created with historical samples are still applicable to modern forensic cases. In fact, the secular changes occurring in these traits contribute to better classification accuracy between sexes in modern populations.

Effects of osteoarthritis on age‐at‐death estimates from the human pelvis

“…In contrast, new research by Wallace et al () suggests that physical inactivity can lead to long‐term changes in disease prevalence. Studies of activity‐related skeletal changes, such as OA, would likely benefit from more nuanced approaches to understanding varied rates of skeletal aging (e.g., changes in bone microarchitecture), particularly in females (Doyle, Lazenby, & Pfeiffer, ) and/or through the study of secular changes in arthritic trait development of skeletal joints that more accurately reflect the diversity in Europe (Jantz & Jantz, ; Klales, ). The exact mechanisms of OA and aging are not clearly understood, which underscores the importance of research to determine how morphological features (e.g., porosity, osteophytes, eburnation) are combined in formal methods to accurately estimate age‐at‐death from the os coxa, since (1) joint degeneration affects multiple skeletal sites at varied rates, and (2) pathological bone responses vary dependent on joint function, anatomical structure and loading (Dieppe, ; Rogers, Shepstone, & Dieppe, ).…”

Multivariate ordinal probit analysis in the skeletal assessment of sex

“…Although we see this as a valuable contribution, we have considerable issues with the statistical methods used in Klales et al (). Although seven years have passed since their publication in this journal, we feel that a comment is necessary because their statistical methods have continued to be used (Kenyhercz, Klales, Stull, McCormick, & Cole, ; Klales, ; Klales & Burns, ; Klales & Cole, ; Lesciotto & Doershuk, ) including recently within this journal (Gómez‐Valdés et al, ).…”

“…Klales and co‐workers (Klales, :297; Klales & Burns, :750; Klales et al, :109) erroneously refer to their analyses as using “ordinal logistic regression,” a technique also known by the shorter name of “ordered logit.” Ordered logit, or the similar ordered probit, is used when there is an ordinal dependent variable, such as in Equation 8 of Konigsberg and Hens (). What Klales and co‐workers used is a logistic regression of the binary variable sex onto scores for the Phenice traits (see Equations 4 and 5 of Konigsberg & Hens, ).…”

Temporal trends in craniometric estimates of admixture for a modern American sample

“…Further, in documenting population‐specific temporal trends, this analysis has important practical implications for the laboratory assessment of modern skeletal collections and human remains of medico‐legal significance. This evidence of short‐term change over time in admixture reiterates the need for skeletal biologists, and forensic anthropologists especially, to engage in regular method reevaluation in order to ensure that the available standards used for the estimation of the biological parameters of interest—here, ancestry by sex—are indeed suited to the peoples who make up the populations of immediate concern (Dirkmaat, Cabo, Ousley, & Symes, ; Algee‐Hewitt, Hughes, & Anderson, 2017; Hughes, Algee‐Hewitt, Reineke, Clausing, & Anderson, 2017; Klales, ; Wilson, Herrmann, & Jantz, ). This study also shows how, when admixture patterns are contextualized in light of what is known about modern Americans, using both census and genetic information relevant to group identification, intermarriage, immigration, and population growth rates, the present findings complement larger demographic trends.…”