Unfortuitously, these conclusions cannot be confirmed through DNA fingerprinting which reduces validation and reliability, therefore, further analysis to ensure

Unfortuitously, these conclusions cannot be confirmed through DNA fingerprinting which reduces validation and reliability, therefore, further analysis to ensure

DNA-17 Profiling. [Online]. 2019. Crown Prosecution Service. Available from: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/dna-17-profiling [Accessed: 5 May 2019].

  • Ferembach, D., (1980). Recommendations for age and sex diagnoses of skeletons. Journal of Human Evolution. 9(7), 517-549. Available from: doi:10.1016/0047-2484(80)90061-5.
  • Giles, E. and Elliot, O., (1963). Sex determination by discriminant function analysis of crania. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 21(1), 53-68. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330210108
  • Giles, E., (1970). Discriminant function sexing of this human skeleton. Personal Identification in Mass Disasters. In Stewart TD (ed.)99-107.
  • Krogman, W., (1962). The human skeleton in forensic medicine. American Journal of Orthodontics. 49(6), 474. Available from: doi:10.1016/0002-9416(63)90175-1.
  • McPherson, M., Quirke, P. & Taylor, G., (1992). PCR: a practical approach. Oxford, IRL.
  • Meindl, R. and Lovejoy, C., (1985). Ectocranial suture closure: A revised way for the determination of skeletal age at death on the basis of the lateral-anterior sutures. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 68(1), 57-66. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330680106.
  • Miles, A., (1963). Dentition into the Estimation of Age. Journal of Dental Research. 42(1), 255-263. Available from: doi:10.1177/00220345630420012701
  • Molleson, T and Cox, M., (1993). The Spitalfields Project, Vol. 2: The Anthropology. The Middling Sort, Research Report 86. Council for British Archaeology: York.
  • NIDDK., (2012). Acromegaly | NIDDK. [online] National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Offered by: https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/endocrine-diseases/acromegaly [Viewed 21 April 2019].
  • Phenice, T., (1969). A newly developed visual approach to sexing the os pubis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 30(2), 297-301. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330300214.
  • Rissech, C., Estabrook, G., Cunha, E. and Malgosa, A., (2006). Using the Acetabulum to Estimate Age at Death of Adult Males*. Journal of Forensic Sciences.  51(2), 213-229. Available from: doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00060.x
  • Scheuer, L. & Black, S., (2004). The juvenile skeleton. London, Elsevier Academic Press.
  • Sutherland, L. and Suchey, J., (1991) Use of the Ventral Arc in Pubic Sex Determination. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 36(2), 13051J. Available from: doi:10.1520/jfs13051j.
  • Todd, T., (1921). Age changes in the pubic bone. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 4(1), 1-70. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330040102
  • Trotter, M., (1970). Estimation of stature from intact long limb bones, in Stewart, T.D. (ed.), Personal Identification in Mass Disasters: National Museum of Natural History, Washington, 71-83.
  • Appendices

    Appendix A

    Feature

    Measurement (mm)

    Cranial length

    187.22

    Cranial breadth

    111.47

    Basion-bregma height

    138.67

    Bizygomatic breadth

    131.39

    Basion prosthion length

    121.63

    Nasion-prosthion line

    68.21

    Maxillo-alveolar breadth

    67.25

    Height of this processus mastoideus

    36.67

    These measurements were then inputted in to the formula below to ascertain sex from the skull.

    Discriminant function formula (Giles & Elliot, 1963):

    (Cranial length*3.107) + (Cranial breadth*-4.643) + (Basion-bregma height*5.786) + (bizygomatic breadth*14.821) + (Basion prosthion length*1.000) + (Nasion-prosthion line*2.714) + (Maxillo-alveolar breadth*-5.179) + (Height of the processus mastoideus*6.071)

    If result is larger than 2676.39, the person is male, if smaller than 2676.39, the person is female.

    Appendix B

    Feature

    Measurement (mm)

    Hipbone height (A)

    212

    Iliac breadth (B)

    161

    Pubis length (C)

    71.675

    Ischium length (D)

    88.41

    Femur head diameter (E)

    45.45

    Epicondylar breadth of femur (F)

    75.26

    There measurements where then inputted in to the formula below Albanese’s (2003) to ascertain sex from the pelvis and femur.

    Probability M/F=1(1+e–Z)

    Model 1, Z = -61.5345 + (0.595*A) – (0.5192*B) – (1.1104*D) + (1.1696*E) + (0.5893*F)

    Model 2, Z = -40.5313 + (0.2572*A) – (0.9852*C) + (0.7303*E) + (0.3177*F)

    Model 3, Z = -30.359 + (0.4323*A) – (0.2217*B) – (0.7404*C) + (0.3412*D)

    If P is higher than 0.5, the person is male, if P is less than 0.5, the person is female.

    Appendix C

    set of corresponding states and ages for every single of this 7 acetabulum variables Rissech’s (2006)

    1. Acetabular groove
      • State 1 – predicted age: 41.6
    2. Acetabular rim shape
      • State 3 – predicted age: 45.9
    3. Acetabular rim porosity
      • State 2 – predicted age: 39
    4. Apex activity
      • State 1 – predicted age: 38.2
    5. Activity regarding the exterior edge of the acetabular fossa
      • State 2 – predicted age: 32.3
    6. Activity of this acetabular fossa
      • State 3 – predicted age: 48.1
    7. Porosities of this acetabular fossa Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp  

    essay about producer biology

    Therefore, to discover a match, AFLP must be repeated ensuring there is adequate, unfragmented DNA along with a proper, high specificity primer. Primer dimers in the bottom of lane 9 suggests the primer concentration was too much, therefore, in order to avoid allelic dropout which may assume homozygosity, lower concentrations must be used when repeating.

    AFLP requires high quality and amount of DNA to prevent allelic dropout, however, it’s likely that this cannot be achieved from this DNA sample. Therefore, DNA-17 may possibly provide greater outcomes as it requires less DNA as a result of improved sensitivity and discrimination between profiles (Crown Prosecution Service, 2019).

    Conclusion

    After analysing all results, one can estimate this is a European male aged between 32 and 43 who was simply 174cm tall, coping with acromegaly. The likely reason behind death is co-morbidity associated with acromegaly progression. Unfortuitously, these conclusions cannot be confirmed through DNA fingerprinting which reduces validation and reliability, therefore, further analysis to ensure this individual’s identity could add more reliable methods involving molecular biology and bone chemistry.

    Sources

    • Albanese, J., (2003).  A Metric Method for Sex Determination utilising the Hipbone as well as the Femur. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 48(2), 2001378. Available from: doi:10.1520/jfs2001378.
    • Bass, W., (1978). Peoples osteology. Columbia, Mo., Missouri Archaeological Society, 196-208.
    • Black, T., (1978). Sexual dimorphism into the tooth-crown diameters of this deciduous teeth. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 48(1), 77-82. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330480111.
    • Brooks, S. and Suchey, J., (1990). Skeletal age determination on the basis of the os pubis: an assessment of this Acsádi-Nemeskéri and Suchey-Brooks practices. Human Evolution. 5(3), 227-238. Available from: doi:10.1007/bf02437238.
    • Carr, L., (1962). Eruption ages of permanent teeth. Australian Dental Journal. 7(5), 367-373. Available from: doi:10.1111/j.1834-7819.1962.tb04884.x.
    • Chapman, I., (2017). Gigantism and Acromegaly – Hormonal and Metabolic Disorders – MSD Manual Consumer Version. [Online]. 2017. MSD Manual Consumer Version. Available from: https://www.msdmanuals.com/en-gb/home/hormonal-and-metabolic-disorders/pituitary-gland-disorders/gigantism-and-acromegaly [Accessed: 27 April 2019].
    • Church, MS., (1995). Determination of Race from the Skeleton through Forensic Anthropological practices. Forensic Science Review. 7(1), 1-39
    • Crown Prosecution Service., (2019). DNA-17 Profiling. [Online]. 2019. Crown Prosecution Service. Available from: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/dna-17-profiling [Accessed: 5 May 2019].
    • Ferembach, D., (1980). Recommendations for age and sex diagnoses of skeletons. Journal of Human Evolution. 9(7), 517-549. Available from: doi:10.1016/0047-2484(80)90061-5.
    • Giles, E. and Elliot, O., (1963). Sex determination by discriminant function analysis of crania. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 21(1), 53-68. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330210108
    • Giles, E., (1970). Discriminant function sexing of this human skeleton. Personal Identification in Mass Disasters. In Stewart TD (ed.)99-107.
    • Krogman, W., (1962). The human skeleton in forensic medicine. American Journal of Orthodontics. 49(6), 474. Available from: doi:10.1016/0002-9416(63)90175-1.
    • McPherson, M., Quirke, P. & Taylor, G., (1992). PCR: a practical approach. Oxford, IRL.
    • Meindl, R. and Lovejoy, C., (1985). Ectocranial suture closure: A revised way for the determination of skeletal age at death on the basis of the lateral-anterior sutures. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 68(1), 57-66. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330680106.
    • Miles, A., (1963). Dentition into the Estimation of Age. Journal of Dental Research. 42(1), 255-263. Available from: doi:10.1177/00220345630420012701
    • Molleson, T and Cox, M., (1993). The Spitalfields Project, Vol. 2: The Anthropology. The Middling Sort, Research Report 86. Council for British Archaeology: York.
    • NIDDK., (2012). Acromegaly | NIDDK. [online] National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Offered by: https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/endocrine-diseases/acromegaly [Viewed 21 April 2019].
    • Phenice, T., (1969). A newly developed visual approach to sexing the os pubis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 30(2), 297-301. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330300214.
    • Rissech, C., Estabrook, G., Cunha, E. and Malgosa, A., (2006). Using the Acetabulum to Estimate Age at Death of Adult Males*. Journal of Forensic Sciences.  51(2), 213-229. Available from: doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00060.x
    • Scheuer, L. & Black, S., (2004). The juvenile skeleton. London, Elsevier Academic Press.
    • Sutherland, L. and Suchey, J., (1991) Use of the Ventral Arc in Pubic Sex Determination. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 36(2), 13051J. Available from: doi:10.1520/jfs13051j.
    • Todd, T., (1921). Age changes in the pubic bone. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 4(1), 1-70. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330040102
    • Trotter, M., (1970). Estimation of stature from intact long limb bones, in Stewart, T.D. (ed.), Personal Identification in Mass Disasters: National Museum of Natural History, Washington, 71-83.

    Appendices

    Appendix A

    Feature

    Measurement (mm)

    Cranial length

    187.22

    Cranial breadth

    111.47

    Basion-bregma height

    138.67

    Bizygomatic breadth

    131.39

    Basion prosthion length

    121.63

    Nasion-prosthion line

    68.21

    Maxillo-alveolar breadth

    67.25

    Height of this processus mastoideus

    36.67

    These measurements were then inputted in to the formula below to ascertain sex from the skull.

    Discriminant function formula (Giles & Elliot, 1963):

    (Cranial length*3.107) + (Cranial breadth*-4.643) + (Basion-bregma height*5.786) + (bizygomatic breadth*14.821) + (Basion prosthion length*1.000) + (Nasion-prosthion line*2.714) + (Maxillo-alveolar breadth*-5.179) + (Height of the processus mastoideus*6.071)

    If result is larger than 2676.39, the person is male, if smaller than 2676.39, the person is female.

    Appendix B

    Feature

    Measurement (mm)

    Hipbone height (A)

    212

    Iliac breadth (B)

    161

    Pubis length (C)

    71.675

    Ischium length (D)

    88.41

    Femur head diameter (E)

    45.45

    Epicondylar breadth of femur (F)

    75.26

    There measurements where then inputted in to the formula below Albanese’s (2003) to ascertain sex from the pelvis and femur.

    Probability M/F=1(1+e–Z)

    Model 1, Z = -61.5345 + (0.595*A) – (0.5192*B) – (1.1104*D) + (1.1696*E) + (0.5893*F)

    Model 2, Z = -40.5313 + (0.2572*A) – (0.9852*C) + (0.7303*E) + (0.3177*F)

    Model 3, Z = -30.359 + (0.4323*A) – (0.2217*B) – (0.7404*C) + (0.3412*D)

    If P is higher than 0.5, the person is male, if P is less than 0.5, the person is female.

    Appendix C

    set of corresponding states and ages for every single of this 7 acetabulum variables Rissech’s (2006)

    1. Acetabular groove
      • State 1 – predicted age: 41.6
    2. Acetabular rim shape
      • State 3 – predicted age: 45.9
    3. Acetabular rim porosity
      • State 2 – predicted age: 39
    4. Apex activity
      • State 1 – predicted age: 38.2
    5. Activity regarding the exterior edge of the acetabular fossa
      • State 2 – predicted age: 32.3
    6. Activity of this acetabular fossa
      • State 3 – predicted age: 48.1
    7. Porosities of this acetabular fossa Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp  

    AFLP requires high quality and amount of DNA to prevent allelic dropout, however, it’s likely that this cannot be achieved from this DNA sample. Therefore, DNA-17 may possibly provide greater outcomes as it requires less DNA as a result of improved sensitivity and discrimination between profiles (Crown Prosecution Service, 2019).

    Conclusion

    After analysing all results, one can estimate this is a European male aged between 32 and 43 who was simply 174cm tall, coping with acromegaly. The likely reason behind death is co-morbidity associated with acromegaly progression. Unfortuitously, these conclusions cannot be confirmed through DNA fingerprinting which reduces validation and reliability, therefore, further analysis to ensure this individual’s identity could add more reliable methods involving molecular biology and bone chemistry.

    Sources

    • Albanese, J., (2003).  A Metric Method for Sex Determination utilising the Hipbone as well as the Femur. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 48(2), 2001378. Available from: doi:10.1520/jfs2001378.
    • Bass, W., (1978). Peoples osteology. Columbia, Mo., Missouri Archaeological Society, 196-208.
    • Black, T., (1978). Sexual dimorphism into the tooth-crown diameters of this deciduous teeth. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 48(1), 77-82. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330480111.
    • Brooks, S. and Suchey, J., (1990). Skeletal age determination on the basis of the os pubis: an assessment of this Acsádi-Nemeskéri and Suchey-Brooks practices. Human Evolution. 5(3), 227-238. Available from: doi:10.1007/bf02437238.
    • Carr, L., (1962). Eruption ages of permanent teeth. Australian Dental Journal. 7(5), 367-373. Available from: doi:10.1111/j.1834-7819.1962.tb04884.x.
    • Chapman, I., (2017). Gigantism and Acromegaly – Hormonal and Metabolic Disorders – MSD Manual Consumer Version. [Online]. 2017. MSD Manual Consumer Version. Available from: https://www.msdmanuals.com/en-gb/home/hormonal-and-metabolic-disorders/pituitary-gland-disorders/gigantism-and-acromegaly [Accessed: 27 April 2019].
    • Church, MS., (1995). Determination of Race from the Skeleton through Forensic Anthropological practices. Forensic Science Review. 7(1), 1-39
    • Crown Prosecution Service., (2019). DNA-17 Profiling. [Online]. 2019. Crown Prosecution Service. Available from: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/dna-17-profiling [Accessed: 5 May 2019].
    • Ferembach, D., (1980). Recommendations for age and sex diagnoses of skeletons. Journal of Human Evolution. 9(7), 517-549. Available from: doi:10.1016/0047-2484(80)90061-5.
    • Giles, E. and Elliot, O., (1963). Sex determination by discriminant function analysis of crania. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 21(1), 53-68. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330210108
    • Giles, E., (1970). Discriminant function sexing of this human skeleton. Personal Identification in Mass Disasters. In Stewart TD (ed.)99-107.
    • Krogman, W., (1962). The human skeleton in forensic medicine. American Journal of Orthodontics. 49(6), 474. Available from: doi:10.1016/0002-9416(63)90175-1.
    • McPherson, M., Quirke, P. & Taylor, G., (1992). PCR: a practical approach. Oxford, IRL.
    • Meindl, R. and Lovejoy, C., (1985). Ectocranial suture closure: A revised way for the determination of skeletal age at death on the basis of the lateral-anterior sutures. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 68(1), 57-66. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330680106.
    • Miles, A., (1963). Dentition into the Estimation of Age. Journal of Dental Research. 42(1), 255-263. Available from: doi:10.1177/00220345630420012701
    • Molleson, T and Cox, M., (1993). The Spitalfields Project, Vol. 2: The Anthropology. The Middling Sort, Research Report 86. Council for British Archaeology: York.
    • NIDDK., (2012). Acromegaly | NIDDK. [online] National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Offered by: https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/endocrine-diseases/acromegaly [Viewed 21 April 2019].
    • Phenice, T., (1969). A newly developed visual approach to sexing the os pubis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 30(2), 297-301. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330300214.
    • Rissech, C., Estabrook, G., Cunha, E. and Malgosa, A., (2006). Using the Acetabulum to Estimate Age at Death of Adult Males*. Journal of Forensic Sciences.  51(2), 213-229. Available from: doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00060.x
    • Scheuer, L. & Black, S., (2004). The juvenile skeleton. London, Elsevier Academic Press.
    • Sutherland, L. and Suchey, J., (1991) Use of the Ventral Arc in Pubic Sex Determination. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 36(2), 13051J. Available from: doi:10.1520/jfs13051j.
    • Todd, T., (1921). Age changes in the pubic bone. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 4(1), 1-70. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330040102
    • Trotter, M., (1970). Estimation of stature from intact long limb bones, in Stewart, T.D. (ed.), Personal Identification in Mass Disasters: National Museum of Natural History, Washington, 71-83.

    Appendices

    Appendix A

    Feature

    Measurement (mm)

    Cranial length

    187.22

    Cranial breadth

    111.47

    Basion-bregma height

    138.67

    Bizygomatic breadth

    131.39

    Basion prosthion length

    121.63

    Nasion-prosthion line

    68.21

    Maxillo-alveolar breadth

    67.25

    Height of this processus mastoideus

    36.67

    These measurements were then inputted in to the formula below to ascertain sex from the skull.

    Discriminant function formula (Giles & Elliot, 1963):

    (Cranial length*3.107) + (Cranial breadth*-4.643) + (Basion-bregma height*5.786) + (bizygomatic breadth*14.821) + (Basion prosthion length*1.000) + (Nasion-prosthion line*2.714) + (Maxillo-alveolar breadth*-5.179) + (Height of the processus mastoideus*6.071)

    If result is larger than 2676.39, the person is male, if smaller than 2676.39, the person is female.

    Appendix B

    Feature

    Measurement (mm)

    Hipbone height (A)

    212

    Iliac breadth (B)

    161

    Pubis length (C)

    71.675

    Ischium length (D)

    88.41

    Femur head diameter (E)

    45.45

    Epicondylar breadth of femur (F)

    75.26

    There measurements where then inputted in to the formula below Albanese’s (2003) to ascertain sex from the pelvis and femur.

    Probability M/F=1(1+e–Z)

    Model 1, Z = -61.5345 + (0.595*A) – (0.5192*B) – (1.1104*D) + (1.1696*E) + (0.5893*F)

    Model 2, Z = -40.5313 + (0.2572*A) – (0.9852*C) + (0.7303*E) + (0.3177*F)

    Model 3, Z = -30.359 + (0.4323*A) – (0.2217*B) – (0.7404*C) + (0.3412*D)

    If P is higher than 0.5, the person is male, if P is less than 0.5, the person is female.

    Appendix C

    set of corresponding states and ages for every single of this 7 acetabulum variables Rissech’s (2006)

    1. Acetabular groove
      • State 1 – predicted age: 41.6
    2. Acetabular rim shape
      • State 3 – predicted age: 45.9
    3. Acetabular rim porosity
      • State 2 – predicted age: 39
    4. Apex activity
      • State 1 – predicted age: 38.2
    5. Activity regarding the exterior edge of the acetabular fossa
      • State 2 – predicted age: 32.3
    6. Activity of this acetabular fossa
      • State 3 – predicted age: 48.1
    7. Porosities of this acetabular fossa Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp  

    After analysing all results, one can estimate this is a European male aged between 32 and 43 who was simply 174cm tall, coping with acromegaly. The likely reason behind death is co-morbidity associated with acromegaly progression. Unfortuitously, these conclusions cannot be confirmed through DNA fingerprinting which reduces validation and reliability, therefore, further analysis to ensure this individual’s identity could add more reliable methods involving molecular biology and bone chemistry.

    Sources

    • Albanese, J., (2003).  A Metric Method for Sex Determination utilising the Hipbone as well as the Femur. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 48(2), 2001378. Available from: doi:10.1520/jfs2001378.
    • Bass, W., (1978). Peoples osteology. Columbia, Mo., Missouri Archaeological Society, 196-208.
    • Black, T., (1978). Sexual dimorphism into the tooth-crown diameters of this deciduous teeth. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 48(1), 77-82. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330480111.
    • Brooks, S. and Suchey, J., (1990). Skeletal age determination on the basis of the os pubis: an assessment of this Acsádi-Nemeskéri and Suchey-Brooks practices. Human Evolution. 5(3), 227-238. Available from: doi:10.1007/bf02437238.
    • Carr, L., (1962). Eruption ages of permanent teeth. Australian Dental Journal. 7(5), 367-373. Available from: doi:10.1111/j.1834-7819.1962.tb04884.x.
    • Chapman, I., (2017). Gigantism and Acromegaly – Hormonal and Metabolic Disorders – MSD Manual Consumer Version. [Online]. 2017. MSD Manual Consumer Version. Available from: https://www.msdmanuals.com/en-gb/home/hormonal-and-metabolic-disorders/pituitary-gland-disorders/gigantism-and-acromegaly [Accessed: 27 April 2019].
    • Church, MS., (1995). Determination of Race from the Skeleton through Forensic Anthropological practices. Forensic Science Review. 7(1), 1-39
    • Crown Prosecution Service., (2019). DNA-17 Profiling. [Online]. 2019. Crown Prosecution Service. Available from: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/dna-17-profiling [Accessed: 5 May 2019].
    • Ferembach, D., (1980). Recommendations for age and sex diagnoses of skeletons. Journal of Human Evolution. 9(7), 517-549. Available from: doi:10.1016/0047-2484(80)90061-5.
    • Giles, E. and Elliot, O., (1963). Sex determination by discriminant function analysis of crania. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 21(1), 53-68. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330210108
    • Giles, E., (1970). Discriminant function sexing of this human skeleton. Personal Identification in Mass Disasters. In Stewart TD (ed.)99-107.
    • Krogman, W., (1962). The human skeleton in forensic medicine. American Journal of Orthodontics. 49(6), 474. Available from: doi:10.1016/0002-9416(63)90175-1.
    • McPherson, M., Quirke, P. & Taylor, G., (1992). PCR: a practical approach. Oxford, IRL.
    • Meindl, R. and Lovejoy, C., (1985). Ectocranial suture closure: A revised way for the determination of skeletal age at death on the basis of the lateral-anterior sutures. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 68(1), 57-66. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330680106.
    • Miles, A., (1963). Dentition into the Estimation of Age. Journal of Dental Research. 42(1), 255-263. Available from: doi:10.1177/00220345630420012701
    • Molleson, T and Cox, M., (1993). The Spitalfields Project, Vol. 2: The Anthropology. The Middling Sort, Research Report 86. Council for British Archaeology: York.
    • NIDDK., (2012). Acromegaly | NIDDK. [online] National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Offered by: https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/endocrine-diseases/acromegaly [Viewed 21 April 2019].
    • Phenice, T., (1969). A newly developed visual approach to sexing the os pubis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 30(2), 297-301. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330300214.
    • Rissech, C., Estabrook, G., Cunha, E. and Malgosa, A., (2006). Using the Acetabulum to Estimate Age at Death of Adult Males*. Journal of Forensic Sciences.  51(2), 213-229. Available from: doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00060.x
    • Scheuer, L. & Black, S., (2004). The juvenile skeleton. London, Elsevier Academic Press.
    • Sutherland, L. and Suchey, J., (1991) Use of the Ventral Arc in Pubic Sex Determination. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 36(2), 13051J. Available from: doi:10.1520/jfs13051j.
    • Todd, T., (1921). Age changes in the pubic bone. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 4(1), 1-70. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330040102
    • Trotter, M., (1970). Estimation of stature from intact long limb bones, in Stewart, T.D. (ed.), Personal Identification in Mass Disasters: National Museum of Natural History, Washington, 71-83.

    Appendices

    Appendix A

    Feature

    Measurement (mm)

    Cranial length

    187.22

    Cranial breadth

    111.47

    Basion-bregma height

    138.67

    Bizygomatic breadth

    131.39

    Basion prosthion length

    121.63

    Nasion-prosthion line

    68.21

    Maxillo-alveolar breadth

    67.25

    Height of this processus mastoideus

    36.67

    These measurements were then inputted in to the formula below to ascertain sex from the skull.

    Discriminant function formula (Giles & Elliot, 1963):

    (Cranial length*3.107) + (Cranial breadth*-4.643) + (Basion-bregma height*5.786) + (bizygomatic breadth*14.821) + (Basion prosthion length*1.000) + (Nasion-prosthion line*2.714) + (Maxillo-alveolar breadth*-5.179) + (Height of the processus mastoideus*6.071)

    If result is larger than 2676.39, the person is male, if smaller than 2676.39, the person is female.

    Appendix B

    Feature

    Measurement (mm)

    Hipbone height (A)

    212

    Iliac breadth (B)

    161

    Pubis length (C)

    71.675

    Ischium length (D)

    88.41

    Femur head diameter (E)

    45.45

    Epicondylar breadth of femur (F)

    75.26

    There measurements where then inputted in to the formula below Albanese’s (2003) to ascertain sex from the pelvis and femur.

    Probability M/F=1(1+e–Z)

    Model 1, Z = -61.5345 + (0.595*A) – (0.5192*B) – (1.1104*D) + (1.1696*E) + (0.5893*F)

    Model 2, Z = -40.5313 + (0.2572*A) – (0.9852*C) + (0.7303*E) + (0.3177*F)

    Model 3, Z = -30.359 + (0.4323*A) – (0.2217*B) – (0.7404*C) + (0.3412*D)

    If P is higher than 0.5, the person is male, if P is less than 0.5, the person is female.

    Appendix C

    set of corresponding states and ages for every single of this 7 acetabulum variables Rissech’s (2006)

    1. Acetabular groove
      • State 1 – predicted age: 41.6
    2. Acetabular rim shape
      • State 3 – predicted age: 45.9
    3. Acetabular rim porosity
      • State 2 – predicted age: 39
    4. Apex activity
      • State 1 – predicted age: 38.2
    5. Activity regarding the exterior edge of the acetabular fossa
      • State 2 – predicted age: 32.3
    6. Activity of this acetabular fossa
      • State 3 – predicted age: 48.1
    7. Porosities of this acetabular fossa Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp  

    Sources

    • Albanese, J., (2003).  A Metric Method for Sex Determination utilising the Hipbone as well as the Femur. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 48(2), 2001378. Available from: doi:10.1520/jfs2001378.
    • Bass, W., (1978). Peoples osteology. Columbia, Mo., Missouri Archaeological Society, 196-208.
    • Black, T., (1978). Sexual dimorphism into the tooth-crown diameters of this deciduous teeth. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 48(1), 77-82. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330480111.
    • Brooks, S. and Suchey, J., (1990). Skeletal age determination on the basis of the os pubis: an assessment of this Acsádi-Nemeskéri and Suchey-Brooks practices. Human Evolution. 5(3), 227-238. Available from: doi:10.1007/bf02437238.
    • Carr, L., (1962). Eruption ages of permanent teeth. Australian Dental Journal. 7(5), 367-373. Available from: doi:10.1111/j.1834-7819.1962.tb04884.x.
    • Chapman, I., (2017). Gigantism and Acromegaly – Hormonal and Metabolic Disorders – MSD Manual Consumer Version. [Online]. 2017. MSD Manual Consumer Version. Available from: https://www.msdmanuals.com/en-gb/home/hormonal-and-metabolic-disorders/pituitary-gland-disorders/gigantism-and-acromegaly [Accessed: 27 April 2019].
    • Church, MS., (1995). Determination of Race from the Skeleton through Forensic Anthropological practices. Forensic Science Review. 7(1), 1-39
    • Crown Prosecution Service., (2019). DNA-17 Profiling. [Online]. 2019. Crown Prosecution Service. Available from: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/dna-17-profiling [Accessed: 5 May 2019].
    • Ferembach, D., (1980). Recommendations for age and sex diagnoses of skeletons. Journal of Human Evolution. 9(7), 517-549. Available from: doi:10.1016/0047-2484(80)90061-5.
    • Giles, E. and Elliot, O., (1963). Sex determination by discriminant function analysis of crania. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 21(1), 53-68. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330210108
    • Giles, E., (1970). Discriminant function sexing of this human skeleton. Personal Identification in Mass Disasters. In Stewart TD (ed.)99-107.
    • Krogman, W., (1962). The human skeleton in forensic medicine. American Journal of Orthodontics. 49(6), 474. Available from: doi:10.1016/0002-9416(63)90175-1.
    • McPherson, M., Quirke, P. & Taylor, G., (1992). PCR: a practical approach. Oxford, IRL.
    • Meindl, R. and Lovejoy, C., (1985). Ectocranial suture closure: A revised way for the determination of skeletal age at death on the basis of the lateral-anterior sutures. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 68(1), 57-66. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330680106.
    • Miles, A., (1963). Dentition into the Estimation of Age. Journal of Dental Research. 42(1), 255-263. Available from: doi:10.1177/00220345630420012701
    • Molleson, T and Cox, M., (1993). The Spitalfields Project, Vol. 2: The Anthropology. The Middling Sort, Research Report 86. Council for British Archaeology: York.
    • NIDDK., (2012). Acromegaly | NIDDK. [online] National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Offered by: https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/endocrine-diseases/acromegaly [Viewed 21 April 2019].
    • Phenice, T., (1969). A newly developed visual approach to sexing the os pubis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 30(2), 297-301. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330300214.
    • Rissech, C., Estabrook, G., Cunha, E. and Malgosa, A., (2006). Using the Acetabulum to Estimate Age at Death of Adult Males*. Journal of Forensic Sciences.  51(2), 213-229. Available from: doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00060.x
    • Scheuer, L. & Black, S., (2004). The juvenile skeleton. London, Elsevier Academic Press.
    • Sutherland, L. and Suchey, J., (1991) Use of the Ventral Arc in Pubic Sex Determination. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 36(2), 13051J. Available from: doi:10.1520/jfs13051j.
    • Todd, T., (1921). Age changes in the pubic bone. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 4(1), 1-70. Available from: doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330040102
    • Trotter, M., (1970). Estimation of stature from intact long limb bones, in Stewart, T.D. (ed.), Personal Identification in Mass Disasters: National Museum of Natural History, Washington, 71-83.

    Appendices

    Appendix A

    Feature

    Measurement (mm)

    Cranial length

    187.22

    Cranial breadth

    111.47

    Basion-bregma height

    138.67

    Bizygomatic breadth

    131.39

    Basion prosthion length

    121.63

    Nasion-prosthion line

    68.21

    Maxillo-alveolar breadth

    67.25

    Height of this processus mastoideus

    36.67

    These measurements were then inputted in to the formula below to ascertain sex from the skull.

    Discriminant function formula (Giles & Elliot, 1963):

    (Cranial length*3.107) + (Cranial breadth*-4.643) + (Basion-bregma height*5.786) + (bizygomatic breadth*14.821) + (Basion prosthion length*1.000) + (Nasion-prosthion line*2.714) + (Maxillo-alveolar breadth*-5.179) + (Height of the processus mastoideus*6.071)

    If result is larger than 2676.39, the person is male, if smaller than 2676.39, the person is female.

    Appendix B