scholarly journals Body mass estimation from dimensions of the fourth lumbar vertebra in middle-aged Finns

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
pp. 5-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niina Korpinen ◽  
Asla Keisu ◽  
Jaakko Niinimäki ◽  
Jaro Karppinen ◽  
Markku Niskanen ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 833-847
Author(s):  
Vladimír Sládek ◽  
Jiří Macháček ◽  
Eliška Makajevová ◽  
Renáta Přichystalová ◽  
Martin Hora

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 227-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blanca Moncunill-Solé ◽  
Guillem Orlandi-Oliveras ◽  
Xavier Jordana ◽  
Lorenzo Rook ◽  
Meike Köhler

2008 ◽  
Vol 269 (10) ◽  
pp. 1276-1293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soledad De Esteban-Trivigno ◽  
Manuel Mendoza ◽  
Miquel De Renzi

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 36-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Loring Burgess ◽  
Shannon C. McFarlin ◽  
Antoine Mudakikwa ◽  
Michael R. Cranfield ◽  
Christopher B. Ruff

2020 ◽  
Vol 173 (3) ◽  
pp. 480-499
Author(s):  
Christopher B. Ruff ◽  
Nicole Squyres ◽  
Juho‐Antti Junno

Author(s):  
Erik Trinkaus ◽  
Alexandra P. Buzhilova ◽  
Maria B. Mednikova ◽  
Maria V. Dobrovolskaya

Considerations of the body proportions and estimates of body mass and stature of the Sunghir people provide a general baseline for the assessment of a variety of aspects of their paleobiology. They also furnish some indications by themselves. Some of these aspects have been men­tioned with respect to sexual assessment of the adult remains (especially Sunghir 1 and 4; chapter 6), and methodological considerations have been addressed in part in chapter 5. What is presented here is a more detailed assessment of size in terms of body mass estimation and stature, and considerations of body proportions to the extent that they can be evaluated for Sunghir 1, 2 and 3. Body mass estimation was discussed in chapter 5, and it is done here exclusively using the dimension of the weight-bearing femoral articulations and/or metaphyses. It provides insights into trends in overall body size and health, but it is also central to the appropriate scaling of other aspects of morphology, from limb length and strength to brain size. Since the early comments of Boule (1911–1913) and Coon (1962), there has been a series of attempts to evaluate the body proportions (principally using limb segment lengths but also body breadth and trunk length) of Pleistocene humans as indications of both ecogeographical patterning among Late Pleistocene humans and possible reflections of their population dynamics (e.g., Trinkaus 1981, 2007; Walker and Leakey 1993; Ruff 1994; Holliday 1997a, 1997b, 2000, 2006a; Trinkaus and Zilhão 2002; Frelat 2007). The critical problem in assessing body proportions is to determine the independent variable. This must be done a priori, based on biological considerations. Stature estimation presents a variety of difficulties among Late Pleistocene humans, given variation in linear body proportions, but it can provide an indication of overall health, especially given the trends evident through the European Upper Paleolithic (Formicola and Giannecchini 1999; Holt and Formicola 2008). Assessments of body proportions depend in part on body mass estimation, and stature predictions depend on body proportions.


2016 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 133-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte A. Brassey

AbstractBody mass is a key parameter for understanding the physiology, biomechanics, and ecology of an organism. Within paleontology, body mass is a fundamental prerequisite for many studies considering body-size evolution, survivorship patterns, and the occurrence of dwarfism and gigantism. The conventional method for estimating fossil body mass relies on allometric scaling relationships derived from skeletal metrics of extant taxa, but the recent application of three-dimensional imaging techniques to paleontology (e.g., surface laser scanning, computed tomography, and photogrammetry) has allowed for the rapid digitization of fossil specimens. Volumetric body-mass estimation methods based on whole articulated skeletons are therefore becoming increasingly popular. Volume-based approaches offer several advantages, including the ability to reconstruct body-mass distribution around the body, and their relative insensitivity to particularly robust or gracile elements, i.e., the so-called ‘one bone effect.’ Yet their application to the fossil record will always be limited by the paucity of well-preserved specimens. Furthermore, uncertainties with regards to skeletal articulation, body density, and soft-tissue distribution must be acknowledged and their effects quantified. Future work should focus on extant taxa to improve our understanding of body composition and increase confidence in volumetric model input parameters.


2016 ◽  
Vol 57 (7) ◽  
pp. 1096-1101 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Rausch ◽  
P. Rust ◽  
M. D. DiFranco ◽  
M. Lassen ◽  
A. Stadlbauer ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document