CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 418Morphological variations and asymmetryForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesForensic and Genetic Research

Craniometric variation among modern human populations

Relethford, John H.·1994·American Journal of Physical Anthropology
DOI 10.1002/ajpa.1330950105
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Previous studies of genetic markers and mitochondrial DNA have found that the amount of variation among major geographic groupings of Homo sapiens is relatively low, accounting for roughly 10% of total variation. This conclusion has had implications for the study of human variation and consideration of alternative models for the origin of modern humans. By contrast, it has often been assumed that the level of among-group variation for morphological traits is much higher. This study examines the level of among-group variation based on craniometric data from a large sample of modern humans originally collected by W. W. Howells. A multivariate method based on quantitative genetics theory was used to provide an estimate of FST--a measure of among-group variation that can be compared with results from studies of genetic markers. Data for 57 craniometric variables on 1,734 crania were analyzed. These data represent six core areas: Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa, Australasia, Polynesia, the Americas, and the Far East. An additional set of analyses was performed using a three-region subset (Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Far East) to provide comparability with several genetic studies. The minimum FST (assuming complete heritability) for the three-region analysis is 0.065, and the minimum FST for the six-region analysis is 0.085. Both of these are less than the average FST from genetic studies (average estimates of 0.10-0.11). The smaller value of the minimum FST estimates is expected since it provides an estimate of FST expected under complete heritability. Using an estimate of average craniometric heritability from the literature provides an estimate of FST of 0.112 for the three-region analysis and 0.144 for the six-region analysis. These results show that genetic and craniometric data are in agreement, qualitatively and quantitatively, and that there is limited variation in modern humans among major geographic regions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ajpa.1330950105

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Previous Qst-based studies of craniofacial divergence assumed h2 = 0.55 and c = 1, resulting in c/h2 greater than 1.

    “In these studies, h2 was assumed to be 0.55 and c was implicitly assumed to be 1, resulting in c/h2 to be greater than 1.”

    From Investigating the case of human nose shape and climate adaptation (2017) · cites this paper as [35]

  • Qst calculated from phenotype data assuming c = h2 is probably best considered the 'minimum' Qst proposed by Relethford (1994).

    “Qst calculated this way is probably best considered to be the ‘minimum’ Qst proposed by Relethford (1994) [35].”

    From Investigating the case of human nose shape and climate adaptation (2017) · cites this paper as [35]

  • Qst calculated from phenotype data assuming c = h2 is probably best considered the 'minimum' Qst proposed by Relethford (1994).

    “Qst calculated this way is probably best considered to be the ‘minimum’ Qst proposed by Relethford (1994) [35].”

    From Investigating the case of human nose shape and climate adaptation (2017) · cites this paper as Relethford (1994)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Relethford, J. H.
Affiliations
SUNY Oneonta (US)
Corresponding author
Relethford, John H.
ORCID
Relethford, John H.
Venue
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1994-09
Volume
95
Issue
1
Pages
53-62
ISSN
  • 0002-9483 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-8644
DOI
10.1002/ajpa.1330950105
OpenAlex
W2110052863
Cited by
418
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 20
FWCI
12.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 3893 d)
Locations
  • American Journal of Physical Anthropology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
State University of New York
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Geometry and Topology › Morphological variations and asymmetry
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
Keywords
craniometric variation, FST, modern human populations, genetic variation, modern human origins
MeSH terms
Africa, Americas, Asia, Australia, Cephalometry, Craniology, Europe, Female, Humans, Male, Polynesia, Skull, Genetic Variation

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