Skeletal Kinship Analysis Using Developmental Anomalies of the Foot

Abstract

Developmental anomalies of the skeleton are often treated as mere curiosities, but in some contexts, they may prove useful to bioarchaeologists for answering questions about the past. One such use can be found in skeletal kinship analysis, where discrete traits can help to identify close genetic relatives in archaeological cemeteries. Previous research suggests that discrete traits used for skeletal kinship analysis should have several characteristics-they must obviously be heritable, but in addition, they should be easy to score as present or absent, their frequencies should not vary by age or sex, and they should be low frequency traits. Low frequency traits are less likely than higher frequency traits to be found in two individuals merely by chance. In this study, we consider 17 developmental anomalies of the human foot as candidates for use in skeletal kinship analysis. The traits are evaluated in terms of the characteristics described above, after which kinship analyses are attempted on two different populations. Ten of the anomalies are found to be good candidates for skeletal kinship analysis, including accessory navicular, four different forms of brachydactyly, three types of tarsal coalition, and two forms of the os intermetatarseum. When frequencies of these traits were examined and compared to a reference sample in three cemeteries, however, only a single group of six possible genetic relatives were identified. The results suggest that skeletal kinship analysis using individual heritable traits is perhaps best applied to small cemeteries or burial clusters rather than larger cemeteries containing many different lineages.

Kinship and morphological similarity in the skeletal remains of individuals with known genealogical data (Bohemia, 19th to 20th centuries): A new methodological approach

“…Some authors, however, are skeptical about the use of osteological methods for the detection of family relationships (Brown, ), because there seems to be no simple correlation between genes and NMTs (Tyrrell, ). On the other hand, according present authors NMTs may be used for the detection of familial relationships (Velemínský & Dobisíková, ; Ricaut et al, ; Case et al, ).…”

“…There are two approaches to achieve this aim: DNA analysis (Ricaut et al, ; Deguilloux et al, ) and morphology. In this case, we use (a) osteological and dental nonmetric traits (NMTs) (Stojanowski & Schillaci, ; Paul & Stojanowski, ; Stojanowski & Hubbard, ), (b) selected bone dimensions (Carson, ; Martínez‐Abadías et al, ), and (c) genetically conditioned anomalies manifested in the skeleton (Anderson, ; Berry, ; Case et al, ). According to previous studies (Rösing, , ; Ritschmeier et al, ; Ricaut et al, ), the greatest importance is attributed to nonmetric (NM) phenotypic traits.…”

“…Nevertheless, research aimed directly at the verification of biological affinity in past populations did not appear until the late 1960s (Ullrich, ). The use of NMTs for verifying biological relationships is of utmost importance in numerous smaller groups (Velemínský & Dobisíková, ; Case et al, ), where there may be some indications (e.g., archeological) of biological relationships (Adachi et al ; Česnys & Tutkuviene, ; Meyer et al, ; Brown, ). In some cases, NMTs were used as a supporting argument for identifying the remains of historical personalities and their family members (Molleson, 1987; Thurzo et al, ; Slavec, ).…”

Transverse basilar cleft: Two more probable familial cases in an archaeological context

“…In archaeological contexts, rare congenital anomalies can be useful for identifying closely related individuals within a site (Alt & Vach, ; Case, Jones, & Offenbecker, ). As a familial trait, TBC has been described in two full‐term fetuses from a tomb in medieval Apulia, Italy (Anderson, ).…”

“…Clinically, TBC is usually asymptomatic (Lombardi, 1961;Johnson & Israel, 1979;Schmidt et al, 1978); however, it sometimes appears as a part of syndromes (Johnson & Israel, 1979;List, 1941;Mahdi & Whitehead, 2017;Whitehead, Nagaraj, & Pearl, 2015;Woon, Kokich, Clarren, & Cohen, 1980). In archaeological contexts, rare congenital anomalies can be useful for identifying closely related individuals within a site (Alt & Vach, 1992;Case, Jones, & Offenbecker, 2017). As a familial trait, TBC has been described in two full-term fetuses from a tomb in medieval Apulia, Italy (Anderson, 2000).…”