4.3 Article

Stature and body mass estimation from skeletal remains in the European Holocene

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 148, Issue 4, Pages 601-617

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.22087

Keywords

body size; anatomical stature technique; long bones; femoral head

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [0642297, 0642710]
  2. Grant Agency of the Czech Republic [206/09/0589]
  3. Academy of Finland
  4. Finnish Cultural Foundation
  5. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci
  6. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [0642710] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci
  8. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [0642297] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Techniques that are currently available for estimating stature and body mass from European skeletal remains are all subject to various limitations. Here, we develop new prediction equations based on large skeletal samples representing much of the continent and temporal periods ranging from the Mesolithic to the 20th century. Anatomical reconstruction of stature is carried out for 501 individuals, and body mass is calculated from estimated stature and biiliac breadth in 1,145 individuals. These data are used to derive stature estimation formulae based on long bone lengths and body mass estimation formulae based on femoral head breadth. Prediction accuracy is superior to that of previously available methods. No systematic geographic or temporal variation in prediction errors is apparent, except in tibial estimation of stature, where northern and southern European formulae are necessary because of the presence of relatively longer tibiae in southern samples. Thus, these equations should bebroadly applicable to European Holocene skeletal samples. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2012. (C) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available