The posterior portion of the ilium as a sex indicator: A validation study

Abstract

Establishing a biological profile of skeletal remains is a key task of forensic anthropologists. Sex estimation is essential in forensic examination, as other elements of the biological profile, such as age at death or stature, are sex dependent. Visual assessment is considered low-cost and quick, therefore it is a commonly applied method of sex estimation. The most reliable results can be obtained with the analysis of the anterior part of the pelvis, however, these skeletal elements are fragile and prone to destruction. In contrary, the more robust posterior portion of the pelvis is often recovered. Several features of the posterior pelvis have been explored in the context of sexual dimorphism. The aim of the present study was to test three previously published methods of sex assessment based on the analysis of the inferior shape of the auricular surface [Novotnỳ, 1975], the greater sciatic notch shape [Walker, 2005 (revised)] and overall morphology, apex morphology and inflection of the auricular surface [Luna et al., 2017]. The sample consisted of 194 individuals of Greek origin from a documented modern collection. Four features of the auricular surface and shape of the greater sciatic notch were examined. Logistic regression analysis was applied to produce a sex discriminatory formula. The method proposed by Luna et al. [2017] failed to produce satisfactory results with overall accuracies of 36%, 50% and 53% for overall morphology, apex morphology and inflection respectively. Slightly better results (64%) were obtained with the inferior shape morphology [Novotnỳ, 1975]. However, the highest accuracy rate of 81% was noted for the greater sciatic notch shape [Walker, 2005 (revised)]. The formula produced in this study allowed correct classification of 83.2% of the sample. This study illustrates that in spite of the presence of sexual dimorphism in the posterior portion of ilium, features of the auricular surface proposed as sex indicators by Novotnỳ [1975] and Luna et al. [2017] should not be used for sex estimation purposes in the Greek population. The formula produced in this study and the greater sciatic notch shape should only be used as additional methods in cases where neither the cranium nor the anterior portion of the pelvis is present.

Sex estimation of os coxae using DSP2 software: A validation study of a Greek sample

“…The study also concludes that the entire pelvis is less accurate than the os coxa and suggests it is not worth any time and effort to articulate and measure the pelvic girdle. A second study on the pelvis examining the morphological features of the surface and the shape of the greater sciatic notch on the same skeletal sample gave poor results [28]. Other studies of sexual dimorphism on the Greek population that calculate accuracy at the 95% probability threshold involve the cranium [26], the humerus [3], the tibia [4,29] the scapula and clavicle [30].…”

Evaluation of the auricular surface method for subadult sex estimation on Italian modern (19th to 20th century) identified skeletal collections

“…Recently, Luna and co-workers (Luna et al, 2017) proposed a new method of sex diagnosis based on morphological and metric features of the auricular surface of the subadult ilia, using a juvenile sample (7-18 years of age) from the Coimbra Identified Skeletons Collection (Portugal) that offered promising results for sex allocation. Villotte (2018) applied this method on a Prehistoric Ligurian (Italy) immature individual, while Bonczarowska and co-workers (Bonczarowska, Bonicelli, Papadomanolakis, & Kranioti, 2019)…”

“…This result can be attributed to difficulties in visually assessing this trait, as the irregular edges of the joint surface could be erroneously identified as presence of an inflection. The same consideration was made by Bonczarowska and co-workers(Bonczarowska et al, 2019). The application ofLuna et al' (2017) method is affected by the state of preservation of the auricular surface, as this area is generally subject to post mortem modification.…”

“…Recently, Luna and co‐workers (Luna et al, 2017) proposed a new method of sex diagnosis based on morphological and metric features of the auricular surface of the subadult ilia, using a juvenile sample (7–18 years of age) from the Coimbra Identified Skeletons Collection (Portugal) that offered promising results for sex allocation. Villotte (2018) applied this method on a Prehistoric Ligurian (Italy) immature individual, while Bonczarowska and co‐workers (Bonczarowska, Bonicelli, Papadomanolakis, & Kranioti, 2019) tested exclusively the morphological variables on 194 adult individuals of Greek origin from a documented modern collection, with unsatisfactory results. This method has been newly validated by Monge Calleja and co‐workers (Monge Calleja, Aranda, Santos, & Luna, 2020) on a subadult sample ranging between 0 and 18 years of age ( N = 61), from the identified skeletal collection of Lisbon (Portugal), confirming the usefulness of the auricular surface for subadult sexual estimation, although offering better results for morphological rather than metric variables.…”

Documented skeletal collections in Greece: Composition, research, and future prospects

“…These questions include topics commonly explored in modern skeletal collections, such as the performance of various age-at-death (Apostolidou et al, 2011;Moraitis, Zorba, Eliopoulos, & Fox, 2014;Nikita, Xanthopoulou, & Kranioti, 2018;Xanthopoulou, Valakos, Youlatos, & Nikita, 2018), sex (Anastopoulou, Eliopoulos, Valakos, & Manolis, 2014;Bertsatos, Christaki, & Chovalopoulou, 2019;Carter Bell, 2013), and ancestry (Bertsatos et al, 2019) (Nikita & Chovalopoulou, 2017). Besides the above methodological-oriented works, the Athens Collection has been employed in the biocultural study of skeletal trauma patterns in contemporary Greeks (Abel, 2004) Research using this collection has involved scholars worldwide and addressed questions principally related to skeletal age-at-death estimation (García-Donas, Dyke, Paine, Nathena, & Kranioti, 2016;Michopoulou, Negre, Nikita, & Kranioti, 2017;, sex estimation by means of cranial and postcranial metrics (Bonczarowska, Bonicelli, Papadomanolakis, & Kranioti, 2019;Kranioti, 2019;Kranioti et al, 2008;Kranioti & Apostol, 2015;Kranioti, Bastir, Sánchez-Meseguer, & Rosas, 2009;Kranioti, García-Donas, & Langstaff, 2014;Kranioti, García-Donas, Prado, Kyriakou, & Langstaff, 2017;Kranioti, Nathena, & Michalodimitrakis, 2011;Kranioti, Šťovíčková, Karell, & Brů žek, 2019;Kranioti, Vorniotakis, Galiatsou, _ Işcan, & Michalodimitrakis, 2009;Nathena, Michopoulou, & Kranioti, 2017;Osipov et al, 2013;Papaioannou, Kranioti, Joveneaux, Nathena, & Michalodimitrakis, 2012;Steyn & _ Işcan, 2008), secular changes in Cretan cranial morphology (Kranioti, 2014), and ancestry estimation based on measurements of the cranium and the long bones…”