Evaluating macroscopic sex estimation methods using genetically sexed archaeological material: The medieval skeletal collection from St John's Divinity School, Cambridge.
Adolescent
Adult
Anthropology, Physical
Archaeology
Female
Genetic Testing
/ statistics & numerical data
History, 15th Century
History, 16th Century
History, Medieval
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Pelvic Bones
/ anatomy & histology
Sex Determination by Skeleton
/ standards
Skull
/ anatomy & histology
Young Adult
genetic sex
medieval
preauricular sulcus
sex estimate accuracy
Journal
American journal of physical anthropology
ISSN: 1096-8644
Titre abrégé: Am J Phys Anthropol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0400654
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2019
02 2019
Historique:
received:
05
06
2018
revised:
22
10
2018
accepted:
25
10
2018
pubmed:
24
12
2018
medline:
21
12
2019
entrez:
22
12
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In tests on known individuals macroscopic sex estimation has between 70% and 98% accuracy. However, materials used to create and test these methods are overwhelming modern. As sexual dimorphism is dependent on multiple factors, it is unclear whether macroscopic methods have similar success on earlier materials, which differ in lifestyle and nutrition. This research aims to assess the accuracy of commonly used traits by comparing macroscopic sex estimates to genetic sex in medieval English material. Sixty-six individuals from the 13th to 16th century Hospital of St John the Evangelist, Cambridge, were assessed. Genetic sex was determined using a shotgun approach. Eighteen skeletal traits were examined, and macroscopic sex estimates were derived from the os coxae, skull, and os coxae and skull combined. Each trait was tested for accuracy to explore sex estimates errors. The combined estimate (97.7%) outperformed the os coxae only estimate (95.7%), which outperformed the skull only estimate (90.4%). Accuracy rates for individual traits varied: Phenice traits were most accurate, whereas supraorbital margins, frontal bossing, and gonial flaring were least accurate. The preauricular sulcus and arc compose showed a bias in accuracy between sexes. Macroscopic sex estimates are accurate when applied to medieval material from Cambridge. However, low trait accuracy rates may relate to differences in dimorphism between the method derivative sample and the St John's collection. Given the sex bias, the preauricular sulcus, frontal bossing, and arc compose should be reconsidered as appropriate traits for sex estimation for this group.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30575013
doi: 10.1002/ajpa.23753
pmc: PMC6492084
doi:
Types de publication
Historical Article
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
340-351Subventions
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 200368/Z/15/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Cambridge Archaeological Unit
Pays : International
Organisme : St John's College
Pays : International
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 2000368/Z/15/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2018 The Authors. American Journal of Physical Anthropology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Références
Bioinformatics. 2009 Jul 15;25(14):1754-60
pubmed: 19451168
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Sep 24;110(39):15758-63
pubmed: 24019490
Am J Phys Anthropol. 1950 Mar;8(1):65-79
pubmed: 15410864
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2016 Jan;159(1):182-3
pubmed: 26767498
Nature. 2015 Feb 19;518(7539):288-91
pubmed: 25693544
J Forensic Sci. 2002 Jan;47(1):19-24
pubmed: 12064650
Science. 2011 Oct 7;334(6052):94-8
pubmed: 21940856
Bioinformatics. 2013 Jul 01;29(13):1682-4
pubmed: 23613487
Forensic Sci Int. 2005 Jan 29;147(2-3):159-64
pubmed: 15567621
Am J Phys Anthropol. 1996 Feb;99(2):231-8
pubmed: 8967324
Gene. 1995 Dec 29;167(1-2):327-32
pubmed: 8566801
PLoS One. 2014 Aug 06;9(8):e104629
pubmed: 25098828
Bioinformatics. 2009 Aug 15;25(16):2078-9
pubmed: 19505943
PLoS One. 2015 May 13;10(5):e0124282
pubmed: 25970602
Am J Phys Anthropol. 1969 Mar;30(2):297-301
pubmed: 5772048
J Forensic Sci. 2016 Sep;61(5):1307-10
pubmed: 27352918
J Forensic Sci. 2006 Jul;51(4):729-35
pubmed: 16882212
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2005 Aug;127(4):385-91
pubmed: 15693026
J Forensic Sci. 2011 Mar;56(2):289-96
pubmed: 21210801
Am J Phys Anthropol. 1989 Jun;79(2):247-52
pubmed: 2742006
J Forensic Sci. 2016 May;61(3):743-51
pubmed: 27122414
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2018 Mar;165(3):604-608
pubmed: 29238956
Cold Spring Harb Protoc. 2010 Jun;2010(6):pdb.prot5448
pubmed: 20516186
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2019 Feb;168(2):340-351
pubmed: 30575013
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989 Mar;86(6):1939-43
pubmed: 2928314
Science. 2018 Jun 1;360(6392):1024-1027
pubmed: 29853687
Am J Phys Anthropol. 1989 May;79(1):117-20
pubmed: 2750876
Ann Hum Biol. 2015;42(3):253-9
pubmed: 25156659
Forensic Sci Int. 2016 Apr;261:165.e1-8
pubmed: 26926105
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008 May;136(1):39-50
pubmed: 18324631
Radiology. 1981 Aug;140(2):354
pubmed: 7255707
Theriogenology. 2010 Jun;73(9):1167-79
pubmed: 20138353
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Sep 11;104(37):14616-21
pubmed: 17715061
J Forensic Sci. 2012 Sep;57(5):1155-60
pubmed: 22458801
Am J Phys Anthropol. 1985 Sep;68(1):79-85
pubmed: 4061604
J Forensic Sci. 2006 Mar;51(2):248-52
pubmed: 16566757
J Forensic Sci. 1990 Nov;35(6):1384-92
pubmed: 2262774
Kaibogaku Zasshi. 2001 Dec;76(6):533-5
pubmed: 11806146
Curr Biol. 2012 Aug 21;22(16):1494-9
pubmed: 22748318
Forensic Sci Int. 2017 Sep;278:407.e1-407.e7
pubmed: 28698063
Arch Dis Child. 2006 Jul;91(7):554-63
pubmed: 16624884
Prenat Diagn. 2013 Jun;33(6):591-7
pubmed: 23592550