Human Osteology 2012
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-374134-9.50022-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Molecular Osteology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
374
0
62

Year Published

2012
2012
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 269 publications
(439 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
3
374
0
62
Order By: Relevance
“…The combined application of all these methods yielded reliable results. For adults, conventional morphological and metric methods for skull, hip, and long bones were applied both to determine sex and to estimate age-at-death (Bass, 1987;White and Folkens, 1991;Buikstra and Ubelaker, 1994;Brickley and McKinley, 2004;Latham and Finnegan, 2010).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The combined application of all these methods yielded reliable results. For adults, conventional morphological and metric methods for skull, hip, and long bones were applied both to determine sex and to estimate age-at-death (Bass, 1987;White and Folkens, 1991;Buikstra and Ubelaker, 1994;Brickley and McKinley, 2004;Latham and Finnegan, 2010).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The femur is the heaviest and strongest bone in the skeleton; as such, it is frequently recovered in forensic and archeological contexts [5,6]. It is also dimorphic within the same population [5], and very useful in sexing skeletal remains.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is also dimorphic within the same population [5], and very useful in sexing skeletal remains. Several dimensions of the femur, including femoral head diameter, femoral length, and bicondylar breadth have been utilized for the allocation of sex in unknown skeletal individuals [1,[7][8][9][10][11][12][13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our analysis of sex-based and age-related differences in degenerative changes, we determined the age and sex of the individuals from which the skeletal materials were derived. Sex was estimated by standard methods, such as pelvic and cranial morphology (White, 2000). Age was also estimated by standard methods using auricular surfaces (Nagaoka et al, 2006), sutural closure, and dental attrition (White, 2000).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sex was estimated by standard methods, such as pelvic and cranial morphology (White, 2000). Age was also estimated by standard methods using auricular surfaces (Nagaoka et al, 2006), sutural closure, and dental attrition (White, 2000). Because the age distribution of the Kamakura people is different to those of the other peoples owing to their relatively short life expectancy (Nagaoka et al, 2006), we interpreted their prevalence rates carefully.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%