CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 236Morphological variations and asymmetryForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesForensic and Genetic Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multivariate apportionment of global human craniometric diversity

Roseman, Charles C., Weaver, Timothy D.·2004·American Journal of Physical Anthropology
DOI 10.1002/ajpa.10424
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Extensive research in human genetics on presumably neutral loci has shown that the overwhelming majority of human diversity is found among individuals within local populations. Previous apportionments of craniometric diversity are similar to these genetic apportionments, implying that interregionally differing selection pressures have played a limited role in producing contemporary human cranial diversity. Here we show that when cranial variation is independently partitioned using principal components analysis of Mosimann shape variables, some estimates of interregional craniometric differentiation are larger than those for most genetic loci. These estimates are similar to estimates for genetic loci where interregionally differing selection pressures are implicated in producing the observed patterns of variation within and among regions. These results suggest that differences among regions in at least some cranial features, particularly in the nasal region, are in part the product of interregionally differing selection pressures. Moreover, these results have implications for assessing the biological affinities of prehistoric samples that are temporally separated from contemporary human reference populations.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ajpa.10424

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Gill GW, 1998, Advances in the identification of human remains, 293
  2. Nei M, 1982, Genetic‐relationship and evolution of human races, Evol Biol, 14, 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 236

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Roseman, C. C., & Weaver, T. D.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Roseman, Charles C.
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-03-26
Volume
125
Issue
3
Pages
257-263
ISSN
  • 0002-9483 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-8644
DOI
10.1002/ajpa.10424
OpenAlex
W2164860460
Cited by
236
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 10
FWCI
9.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • American Journal of Physical Anthropology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Morphological variations and asymmetry
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
Keywords
craniometric variation, interregional differentiation, natural selection, nasal region, biological affinity
MeSH terms
Cephalometry, Humans, Skull, Genetic Variation, Multivariate Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review