Lifespan approach to the study of human biology: An introductory overview

Leidy, Lynnette E.

doi:10.1002/(sici)1520-6300(1996)8:6<699::aid-ajhb1>3.0.co;2-p

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…52 In contrast the concept of the life span used in psychology assumes that development and aging form a continuous process from birth to death. The distinction between life span and life course, the term used more commonly in sociology, is mainly a matter of scientific history.…”

Section: Life Cycle/life Span/life Coursementioning

confidence: 99%

Life course epidemiology

Kuh

2003

Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health

1,595

1,229

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Life Cycle/life Span/life Coursementioning

confidence: 99%

Life course epidemiology

Kuh

2003

Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health

1,595

1,229

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Life history theory is concerned with the trade-offs between growth, reproduction and maintenance (McDade, 2003), and how these interacting factors affect the evolution of a particular life history pattern. It requires identifying clear developmental and degenerative endpoints on the skeleton, which serve as a proxy for those biological events that cannot be observed on the skeleton, but through which all humans must pass (Leidy, 1996). The use of a model of progressive life stages can circumvent many of the difficulties that arise when determining the chronological age of individuals.…”

Section: Life History Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using the life history model to set the stage(s) of growth and senescence in bioarchaeology and paleodemography

Roksandić

Armstrong

2011

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paleodemography, the study of demographic parameters of past human populations, relies on assumptions including biological uniformitarianism, stationary populations, and the ability to determine point age estimates from skeletal material. These assumptions have been widely criticized in the literature and various solutions have been proposed. The majority of these solutions rely on statistical modeling, and have not seen widespread application. Most bioarchaeologists recognize that our ability to assess chronological age is inherently limited, and have instead resorted to large, qualitative, age categories. However, there has been little attempt in the literature to systematize and define the stages of development and ageing used in bioarchaeology. We propose that stages should be based in the human life history pattern, and their skeletal markers should have easily defined and clear endpoints. In addition to a standard five-stage developmental model based on the human life history pattern, current among human biologists, we suggest divisions within the adult stage that recognize the specific nature of skeletal samples. We therefore propose the following eight stages recognizable in human skeletal development and senescence: infancy, early childhood, late childhood, adolescence, young adulthood, full adulthood, mature adulthood, and senile adulthood. Striving toward a better prediction of chronological ages will remain important and could eventually help us understand to what extent past societies differed in the timing of these life stages. Furthermore, paleodemographers should try to develop methods that rely on the type of age information accessible from the skeletal material, which uses life stages, rather than point age estimates.

show abstract

“…Life history approaches to human biology suggest that physiology and phenotype result from tradeoffs in energy allocation between growth, maintenance, and reproduction (Stearns, 1989). Life history transitions between growth and reproduction (age at menarche) and between reproduction (parity, breastfeeding) and maintenance are well‐studied in human biology (Ellison, 1990; Ellison, Panter‐Brick, Lipson, & O'Rourke, 1993; Jasienska, 2013; Leidy, 1996; Vitzthum, 2009), and recent work integrates life history traits with skeletal biology to show that some traits associated with women's reproduction are linked to bone mineral density (BMD) and bone size (Macintosh, Wells, & Stock, 2018; Madimenos, Snodgrass, Liebert, Cepon, & Sugiyama, 2012; Stieglitz et al, 2015, 2019). This linkage may partially be related to changes in hormones affecting bone development and maintenance, including longitudinal growth during adolescence and periosteal growth during adulthood (Devlin et al, 2010; Grumbach & Auchus, 1999; Westerlind, Wronski, Ritman, & Luo, 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone density and frame size in adult women: Effects of body size, habitual use, and life history

Lee

Rogers-LaVanne

Galbarczyk

et al. 2020

American J Hum Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Bone mineral density (BMD) and frame size are important predictors of future bone health, with smaller frame size and lower BMD associated with higher risk of later fragility fractures. We test the effects of body size, habitual use, and life history on frame size and cortical BMD of the radius and tibia in sample of healthy adult premenopausal women. Methods We used anthropometry and life history data from 123 women (age 18‐46) from rural Poland. Standard techniques were used to measure height, weight, and body fat. Life history factors were recorded using surveys. Grip strength was measured as a proxy for habitual activity, wrist breadth for skeletal frame size. Cortical BMD was measured at the one‐third distal point of the radius and mid‐point of the tibia using quantitative ultrasound (reported as speed of sound, SoS). Results Radial SoS was high (mean t‐score 3.2 ± 1.6), but tibia SoS was average (mean t‐score 0.35 ± 1.17). SoS was not associated with age, although wrist breadth was positively associated with age after adjusting for height. Radius SoS was not associated with measures of body size, habitual use, or life history factors. Wrist breadth was associated with body size (p < .05 for all), lean mass, and grip strength. Tibia SoS was associated with height. Life history factors were not associated with frame size or cortical SoS. Conclusions Habitual use and overall body size are more strongly associated with frame size and cortical SoS than life history factors in this sample of healthy adult women.

show abstract

Lifespan approach to the study of human biology: An introductory overview

Cited by 12 publications

References 23 publications

Life course epidemiology

Life course epidemiology

Using the life history model to set the stage(s) of growth and senescence in bioarchaeology and paleodemography

Bone density and frame size in adult women: Effects of body size, habitual use, and life history

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About