Sexual dimorphism in human skulls. A comparison of sexual dimorphism in different populations
Application and comparison of sex discriminant functions in different populations led to the conclusion that a certain combination and weighting of a few sex dimorphism variables (in this study we only used craniometric variables) can give a good discrimination between male and female individuals, independent of the racial group to which this function is applied.
In our study, the sex-discriminatory power of five discriminant functions which were based on different ordination and selection procedures (e.g. professional knowledge, stepwise discriminant analysis, literature) of the cranial variables is compared. These discriminant functions were applied to three different data sets, the first being skull measurements from an Amsterdam series (Europids), the second skull measurements of a Zulu series (Negrids) and the third skull measurements of a Japan series (Mongolids).
Our decision as to whether a function is a good or less good sex-discriminating function is determined by the Dt values (these values give an idea about the discriminatory value of the discriminant function when applied to a new test sample), the number of variables necessary to obtain this Dt and the location of the sectioning point (i.e. comparison between the estimation of the sectioning point and the ”real” sectioning point).
These discriminant functions were compared withGiles Elliot's (1962, 1963) “race-independent” sex function.
Key wordsdiscriminant function sex dimorphism humans
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Breul D., 1974.Methoden der Geschlechts, Körperlängen und Lebensalterbestimmung von Skelettfunden. Verlag Max Schmidt-Römhild, Lubeck.Google Scholar
- Crichton J.M., 1966.Craniometry and multivariate analysis. A multiple discriminant analysis of Egyptian and African Negro crania. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, 57: 47–63.Google Scholar
- Giles E. &Elliot O., 1962.Race identification from cranial measurements. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 7: 147–157.Google Scholar
- Henke W., 1973.Zur Methode der diskriminanzanalytischen Geschlechtsbestimmung am Schädel. Homo 24: 99–177.Google Scholar
- Howells W.W., 1966.Craniometry and multivariate analysis. The Jomon population of Japan. A study by discriminant analysis of Japanese and Ainu crania. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, 57: 1–43.Google Scholar
- Howells W.W., 1973.Cranial variation in man. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 67.Google Scholar
- Larnach S.L. &Freedman L., 1964.Sex determination of aboriginal crania from coastal New South Wales, Australia. Records of the Australian Museum, 26: 295–308.Google Scholar
- Lestrel P.E., 1974.Fourier analysis of cranial shape: a longitudinal study. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 40: 143 (abstract).Google Scholar
- Uytterschaut H.T., 1983.Affinities of Philippine populations. An application of multivariate techniques to human skull data. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Groningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar