Sexual dimorphism in America: geometric morphometric analysis of the craniofacial region
Erin H Kimmerle1, Ann Ross, Dennis Slice
1Department of Anthropology, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Avenue SOC 107, Tampa, FL 33620-8100, USA. kimmerle@cas.usf.edu
Abstract:
One of the four pillars of the anthropological protocol is the estimation of sex. The protocol generally consists of linear metric analysis or visually assessing individual skeletal traits on the skull and pelvis based on an ordinal scale of 1-5, ranging from very masculine to very feminine. The morphologic traits are then some how averaged by the investigator to estimate sex. Some skulls may be misclassified because of apparent morphologic features that appear more or less robust due to size differences among individuals. The question of misclassification may be further exemplified in light of comparisons across populations that may differ not only in cranial robusticity but also in stature and general physique. The purpose of this study is to further examine the effect of size and sex on craniofacial shape among American populations to better understand the allometric foundation of skeletal traits currently used for sex estimation. Three-dimensional coordinates of 16 standard craniofacial landmarks were collected using a Microscribe-3DX digitizer. Data were collected for 118 American White and Black males and females from the W.M. Bass Donated Collection and the Forensic Data Bank. The MANCOVA procedure tested shape differences as a function of sex and size. Sex had a significant influence on shape for both American Whites (F = 2.90; d.f. = 19, 39; p > F = 0.0024) and Blacks (F = 2.81; d.f. = 19, 37; p > F = 0.0035), whereas size did not have a significant influence on shape in either Whites (F = 1.69; d.f. = 19, 39; p > F = 0.08) or Blacks (F = 1.09; d.f. = 19, 37; p > F = 0.40). Therefore, for each sex, individuals of various sizes were statistically the same shape. In other words, while significant differences were present between the size of males and females (males on average were larger), there was no size effect beyond that accounted for by sex differences in size. Moreover, the consistency between American groups is interesting as it suggests that population differences in sexual dimorphism may result more from human variation in size than allometric variation in craniofacial morphology.
Related Concept Videos
01:27Cranial Bones: Lateral View
The temporal bone forms the lower lateral side of the skull. The temporal bone is subdivided into several regions. The flattened upper portion is the squamous portion of the temporal bone. Below this area and projecting anteriorly is the zygomatic process of the temporal bone, which forms the posterior portion of the zygomatic arch. Posteriorly is the mastoid portion of the temporal bone. Projecting...
01:08Overview of the Skull
The cranial vault surrounds and protects the brain and houses the middle and inner ear structures. This cavity is bounded superiorly by the rounded top of the skull, which...
01:14Cranial Bones: Superior and Posterior View
The frontal bone is the single bone that forms the forehead. At its anterior midline, between the eyebrows, there is a slight depression called the glabella. The frontal bone also forms the supraorbital margin of the orbit. Near the middle of this margin is the supraorbital foramen, the opening that provides passage for a sensory nerve to the forehead. The frontal bone is thickened just above each supraorbital margin,...