Determination of sex in South African Blacks by discriminant function analysis of mandibular linear dimensions: A preliminary investigation using the Zulu Local population

Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 263-268

  Franklin, Daniel ^a   O'Higgins, Paul ^b   Oxnard, Charles E ^a   Dadour, Ian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HULL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Discriminant function; Forensic anthropology; Mandible; Sexing; South African Blacks

Indexed keywords

EID: 33947222566     PISSN: 1547769X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1385/FSMP:2:4:263     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Franklin D, Oxnard CE, O'Higgins P, Dadour I. Sexual dimorphism in the subadult mandible: quantification using geometric morphometrics. J Forensic Sci, in press.
2. Sutter RC. Nonmetric subadult skeletal sexing traits: I. A blind test of the accuracy of eight previously proposed methods using prehistoric known-sex mummies from northern Chile. J Forensic Sci 2003;8:927-935.
3. Holcomb SMC, Konigsberg LW. Statistical study of sexual dimorphism in the human fetal sciatic notch. Am J Phys Anthropol 1995;97:113-125.
4. Dayal MR, Bidmos MA. Discriminating sex in South African Blacks using patella dimensions. J Forensic Sci 2005;50:1294-1297.
5. Steyn M, İşcan MY. Sexual dimorphism in the crania and mandibles of South African whites. Forensic Sci Int 1998;98:9-16.
6. Franklin D, Freedman L, Milne N. Sexual dimorphism and discriminant function sexing in indigenous South African crania. HOMO 2005;55:213-228.
7. Giles E. Sex Determination by discriminant function analysis of the mandible. Am J Phys Anthropol 1964;22:129-136.
8. Fabian FM, Mpembeni R. Sexual dimorphism in the mandibles of a homogeneousn black population of Tanzania. Tanz J Sci 2002;28:47-54.
9. Loth SR, Henneberg M. Mandibular ramus flexure: a new morphological indicator of sexual dimorphism in the human skeleton. Am J Phys Anthropol 1996;99:473-485.
10. Donnelly SM, Hens SM, Rogers NL, Schneider KL. Technical note: a blind test of mandibular ramus flexure as a morphological indicator of sexual dimorphism in the human skeleton. Am J Phys Anthropol 1998;107:363-366.
11. Haun SJ. Brief communication: A study of the predictive accuracy of mandibular ramus flexure as a single morphologic indicator of sex in an archaeological sample. Am J Phys Anthropol 2000;111:429-432.
12. Hill CA. Technical note: evaluating mandibular ramus flexure as a morphological indicator of sex. Am J Phys Anthropol 2000;111:573-577.
13. de Villiers H. The Skull of the South African Negro: A Biometrical and Morphological Study. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press, 1968.
14. de Villiers H. Sexual dimorphism of the skull of the South African Bantu-speaking Negro. South Afr J Sci 1968;64:118-124.
15. Rightmire GP. Discriminant function sexing of Bushman and South African Negro crania. South Afr Archaeol Bull 1971;26:132-138.
16. Steyn M, İşcan MY. Sex determination from the femur and tibia in South African whites. Forensic Sci Int 1997;90:111-119.
17. L'Abbe EN, Loots M, Meiring JH. The Pretoria bone collection: a modern South African skeletal sample. HOMO 2005;56:197-205.
18. Tobias PV. Memories of Robert James Terry (1871-1966) and the genesis of the Terry and Dart collections of human skeletons. Adler Museum Bulletin 1987;13:31-34.
19. Franklin D, Freedman L, Milne N. Three-dimensional technology for linear morphological studies: a re-examination of cranial variation in four southern African indigenous populations. HOMO 2005;56:17-34.
20. Buikstra JE, Ubelaker DH. Standards for Data Collection From Human Skeletal Remains Fayetteville. Arkansas: Arkansas Archaeological Survey, 1994.
21. Lyman RL. Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge,UK:Cambridge University Press, 1994.
22. Waldron T. The relative survival of the human skeleton: implications for palaeopathology. In: Boddington A, Garland AN, Janaway RC, eds. Death, Decay and Reconstruction:Approaches to Archaeology and Forensic Science. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1987, pp. 55-64.
23. Stojanowski CM, Seidemann RM, Doran GH. Differential skeletal preservation at Windover Pond: causes and consequences. Am J Phys Anthropol 2002;119:15-26.
24. Franklin D, O'Higgins P, Oxnard CE, Dadour I. Sexual dimorpnism and population variation in the adult mandible: forensic applications of geometric morphometrics. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 2007, in press.
25. Rosas A, Bastir M, Martinez-Maza C, Bermudez de Castro J. Sexual dimorphism in the Atapuerca-SH hominids: the evidence from the mandibles. J Hum Evol 2002;42:451-474.
26. Humphrey LT, Dean MC, Stringer CB. Morphological variation in great ape and modern human mandibles. J Anat 1999;195:491-513.
27. Weijs WA, Hillen B. Correlations between the cross-sectional area of the jaw muscles and craniofacial size and shape. Am J Phys Anthropol 1986;70:423-431.
28. Enlow DH, Hans MG. Essentials of Facial Growth. New York: W.B. Saunders, 1996.