Humeral and femoral head diameters in recent white american skeletons

Journal of Forensic Sciences

Volumn 57, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 35-40

  Milner, George R ^a   Boldsen, Jesper L ^b  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Femoral head diameter; Forensic anthropology; Forensic science; Humeral head diameter; Probability estimates; Skeletal sex estimation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CAUCASIAN; FEMALE; FEMUR; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMERUS; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY; PROBABILITY; SEX DETERMINATION; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; EUROPEAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; FEMALE; FEMUR; FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGY; HUMANS; HUMERUS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROBABILITY; SEX DETERMINATION BY SKELETON; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84855355918     PISSN: 00221198     EISSN: 15564029     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01953.x     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Jantz RL, Ousley SD. FORDISC 3.0 personal computer forensic discriminate functions. Knoxville, TN: Forensic Anthropology Center, University of Tennessee, 2005.
2. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern epidemiology, 3rd edn. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2008.
3. Albanese J, Cardoso HFV, Saunders SR. Universal methodology for developing univariate sample-specific sex determination methods: an example using the epicondylar breadth of the humerus. J Forensic Sci 2005;32:143-52.
4. Milner GR, Wood JW, Boldsen JL. Advances in paleodemography. In: Katzenberg MA, Saunders SR, editors. Biological anthropology of the human skeleton, 2nd edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Liss, 2008;561-600.
5. Wood JW, Holman DJ, O'Connor KA, Ferrell RJ. Mortality models for paleodemography. In: Hoppa RD, Vaupel JW, editors. Paleodemography: age distributions from skeletal samples. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002;129-68.
6. Buikstra JE, Ubelaker DH, editors. Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Research Series 44. Fayetteville, AR: Arkansas Archeological Survey, 1994.
7. Moore-Jansen PM, Ousley SD, Jantz RL. Data collection procedures for forensic skeletal material, 3rd edn. Report of Investigations 48. Knoxville, TN: Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, 1994.
8. Stewart TD. Essentials of forensic anthropology: especially as developed in the United States. Springfield, IL: CC Thomas, 1979.
9. Kranioti EF, Michalodimitrakis M. Sexual dimorphism of the humerus in contemporary Cretans-a population-specific study and a review of the literature. J Forensic Sci 2009;54:996-1000.
10. Steyn M, I.;şcan MY. Osteometric variation in the humerus: sexual dimorphism in South Africans. Forensic Sci Int 1999;106:77-85.
11. Robinson MS, Bidmos MA. The skull and humerus in the determination of sex: reliability of discriminant function equations. Forensic Sci Int 2009;186:86.e1-5.
12. France DL. Observational and metric analysis of sex in the skeleton. In: Reichs KJ, editor. Forensic osteology: advances in the identification of human remains, 2nd edn. Springfield, IL: CC Thomas, 1998;163-86.
13. Steyn M, I.;şcan MY. Sex determination from the femur and tibia in South African whites. Forensic Sci Int 1997;90:111-9.
14. I.;şcan MY, Miller-Shaivitz P. Sexual dimorphism in the femur and tibia. In: Reichs KJ, editor. Forensic osteology: advances in the identification of human remains. Springfield, IL: CC Thomas, 1986;101-11.