Sex estimation in human skeletal remains when using the cranium through traditional methods is a fundamental pillar in human identification; however, it may be possible to incur in a margin of error due because of the state of preservation in incomplete or fragmented remains. The aim of this investigation was sex estimation through the geometric morphometric analysis of the frontal bone. The sample employed 60 lateral radiographs of adult subjects of both sexes (30 males and 30 females), aged between 18 and 40 years, with mean age for males of 28 ± 4 and 30 ± 6 years for females. Thin-plate splines evidenced strong expansion of the glabellar region in males and contraction in females. No significant differences were found between sexes with respect to size. The findings suggest differences in shape and size in the glabellar region, besides reaffirming the use of geometric morphometrics as a quantitative method in sex estimation.

References

1Sheuer L. Application of osteology to forensic medicine. Clin Anat 2002; 15: 297–312.
10.1002/ca.10028
Web of Science® Google Scholar
2Spradley MK, Jantz R. Sex estimation in forensic anthropology: skull versus postcranial elements. J Forensic Sci 2011; 56(2): 289–96.
10.1111/j.1556-4029.2010.01635.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
3Bethard J, Sheet B. Sex determination from the second cervical vertebra: a test of Wescott's method on a modern American sample. J Forensic Sci 2013; 58(1): 101–3.
10.1111/j.1556-4029.2012.02183.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4Walrath DE, Turner P, Bruzek J. Reliability test of the visual assessment of cranial traits for sex determination. Am J Phys Anthropol 2004; 125: 132–7.
10.1002/ajpa.10373
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5Williams BA, Rogers T. Evaluating the accuracy and precision of cranial morphological traits for sex determination. J Forensic Sci 2006; 51(4): 729–35.
10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00177.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6Walker PL. Sexing skulls using discriminant function analysis of visually assessed traits. Am J Phys Anthropol 2008; 136(1): 39–50.
10.1002/ajpa.20776
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7Gaper R, Black S, Last J. Sex determination from the foramen magnum: discriminant function analysis in an eighteenth and nineteenth century British sample. Int J Legal Med 2009; 123(1): 25–33.
10.1007/s00414-008-0256-0
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
8Rosas A, Bastir M. Thin-plate spline analysis of allometry and sexual dimorphism in the human craniofacial complex. Am J Phys Anthropol 2002; 117(3): 236–45.
10.1002/ajpa.10023
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9Kimmerle E, Ross A, Slice D. Sexual dimorphism in America: geometric morphometric analysis of the craniofacial region. J Forensic Sci 2008; 53(1): 54–7.
10.1111/j.1556-4029.2007.00627.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
10Gonzales P, Bernal V, Perez S. Analysis of sexual dimorphism of craniofacial traits using geometric morphometric techniques. Int J Osteoarchaeol 2011; 21: 82–91.
10.1002/oa.1109
Web of Science® Google Scholar
11Bookstein FL. Morphometric tools for landmark data: Geometry and biology. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Google Scholar
12Toro M, Manriquez G, Suazo I. Morfometría geométrica y el estudio de las formas biológicas: de la morfología descriptiva a la morfología cuantitativa. Int J Morphol 2010; 28(4): 977–90.
10.4067/S0717-95022010000400001
Web of Science® Google Scholar
13Potgieter W, Meiring J, Boon J, Petrorius E, Petrorius J, Becker P. Mandibular landmarks as an aid in minimizing injury to the marginal mandibular branch: a metric and geometric anatomical study. Clin Anat 2005; 18(3): 171–8.
10.1002/ca.20099
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
14Viðarsdóttir U, O'Higgins P, Stringer C. A geometric morphometric study of regional differences in the ontogeny of the modern human facial skeleton J Anat 2002; 201(3): 211–29.
10.1046/j.1469-7580.2002.00092.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15McIntyre G, Mossey P. Size and shape measurement in contemporary cephalometrics. Eur J Orthod 2003; 25(3): 231–42.
10.1093/ejo/25.3.231
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16McDowell J, L'Abbé E, Kenyhercz M. Nasal aperture shape evaluation between black and white South Africans. Forensic Sci Int 2012; 222(1–3): 397.e1–6.
10.1016/j.forsciint.2012.06.007
Web of Science® Google Scholar
17Rohlf FJ. tpsDig; Version 1.4. Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook.tpsSplin, 2004; http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/ (accessed December 10, 2012).
Google Scholar
18Rohlf FJ. tpsSpline; Version 1.20. Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook.tpsSplin. 2004; http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/ (accessed December 12, 2012).
Google Scholar
19Shearer B, Sholts S, Garvin H, Wärmländer S. Sexual dimorphism in human browridge volume measured from 3D models of dry crania: a new digital morphometrics approach. Forensic Sci Int 2012; 222(1–3): 400.e1–5.
10.1016/j.forsciint.2012.06.013
Google Scholar
20Garvin H, Ruff C. Sexual dimorphism in skeletal browridge and chin morphologies determined using a new quantitative method. Am J Phys Anthropol 2012; 147(4): 661–70.
10.1002/ajpa.22036
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21Rodríguez JV. La diversidad poblacional de Colombia en el tiempo y espacio: Estudio craneométrico. Revista Academia colombiana de Ciencias 2007; 31: 321–46.
Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume59, Issue5

September 2014

Pages 1330-1332

Sex Determination from the Frontal Bone: A Geometric Morphometric Study

Abstract

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Sex Determination from the Frontal Bone: A Geometric Morphometric Study

Abstract

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information