Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
groupings to better differentiate the climatic and altitude allometric proportions. These
groups include (1) high latitude/Arctic, (2) temperate, and (3) Great Plains. Auerbach and
Ruff (2010) used the revised Fully method as a proxy for living stature, as it has shown to
be successful universally. These formulae were then used to test their sex-specific regression
equations based on single elements (
Auerbach and Ruff, 2010
).
Forensic Anthropology
In a forensic context, a Bayesian model or the use of informative or known priors should be
the preferred model for stature estimation. Basically, Bayesian inference uses both
uncondi-
tional
(or the prior probability of a given stature being in the target sample) and
conditional
(the probability of obtaining the observed long bone length conditional on a given stature
from the reference sample) probabilities to produce an informed parameter (
Ross and
Kimmerle, 2010
). For example,
Ross and Konigsberg (2002)
used the knowledge that Eastern
Europeans are taller than European Americans as a “known prior” in developing population-
specific equations for the Balkans (
Ross and Konigsberg, 2002
).
CONCLUSION
There are many populations around the world in need of population-specific stature
formulae, and thus, many opportunities for new research to be conducted in stature estima-
tion. Accurate stature estimation requires that relevant formulae be developed that are pop-
ulation, age, sex, and temporally specific. Not only do body proportions vary around the
world, but secular change can cause variations in stature and proportions from one genera-
tion to the next within a population. Most new research should focus on developing formulae
for mathematical stature estimation from the long bones, vertebrae, or long bone fragments.
Universal applicability of the revised Fully method (
Raxter et al., 2006
) has been demon-
strated, but should be further tested in other populations.
Stature estimation is necessary in both bioarchaeological and forensic contexts. For a bio-
archaeological researcher, if you have access to samples that are sufficiently large with skele-
tons intact, testing your new mathematical regression formulae against stature estimations
based on the revised Fully method (
Raxter et al., 2006
) is the best option; however, this method
is not very practical for forensic applications. When the entire skeleton is available, the revised
Fully method is the most accurate method for stature estimation. In developing a mathematical
method, the leg bones are the next best estimator of stature. If the leg bones are unavailable or
fragmentary, try testing the
Simmons et al. (1990)
method to estimate stature from a fragment
of the bone. If you only have smaller elements, the metacarpals have shown good success. For
developing formulae for contemporary populations using known modern skeletal collections,
use of a Bayesian statistical approach is advised. If there are only a few incomplete and isolated
individuals that seem abnormally large or small, follow the advice for stature estimation with
extreme extrapolation by Konigsberg and colleagues (1998).
Despite the seemingly overabundance of studies to estimate stature, new studies are
always needed. Do your homework and investigate different collections around the U.S.
or around the world that are available for study. Before jumping headfirst into your own
research, try jumping at an opportunity to get involved in someone else's research, either
