CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 91Morphological variations and asymmetryForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesForensic and Genetic Research

The relative efficacy of functional and developmental cranial modules for reconstructing global human population history

von Cramon‐Taubadel, Noreen·2011·American Journal of Physical Anthropology
DOI 10.1002/ajpa.21550
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study tests the relative efficacy of human cranial modules, defined on the basis of developmental and functional criteria, for reconstructing neutral genetic population history. Specifically, two hypotheses were tested: 1) The "basicranial hypothesis" predicts that the endochondrally ossifying basicranium will be more reliable for reconstructing population history than intramembranously ossifying regions of the human cranium. This is based on the assumption that early ossification of the basicranium and its distinct functional constraints produce a cranial structure that is relatively immune to non-neutral evolutionary forces. 2) The "single function hypothesis" predicts that cranial regions associated with a single (sensory) function are less reliable indicators of neutral genetic history. Here the prediction is based on the logic that complex, multi-functional, integrated cranial regions are less likely toexhibit homoplasy and, therefore, provide a more accurate morphological proxy for genetic relationships. The congruence between craniometric affinity matrices and neutral genetic population matrices based on autosomal microsatellite and classical markers was assessed using a series of Mantel and Dow-Cheverud tests. The results did not support the predictions of the "basicranial hypothesis," as the endochondrally ossifying basicranium was not significantly more congruent with the genetic data than intramembraneously ossifying modules. Moreover, although the results provided some support for the "single function hypothesis," defining cranial modules on the basis of anatomical or functional complexity did not provide a consistent means of predicting their phylogenetic efficacy. These results have important implications for building an accurate inference model of cranial evolution in the human fossil record.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ajpa.21550

Cites

74 of 74 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?

  • Morphological integration is not absolute but organized in units that are relatively independent while participating to generate a structure that acts as a functional whole.

    “Nonetheless, this integration is not absolute but organized in units that are relatively independent while participating to generate a structure that act as functional whole.”

    From Morphological consequences of artificial cranial deformation: Modularity and integration (2020) · cites this paper as [16]

  • In the human cranium, the most noticeable source of loads is mastication, and its effect is more important in the lower face.

    “In the human cranium, the most noticeable source of loads is mastication, and its effect has been shown to be more important in the lower face [16].”

    From Morphological consequences of artificial cranial deformation: Modularity and integration (2020) · cites this paper as [16]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
von Cramon‐Taubadel, N.
Venue
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-09
Volume
146
Issue
1
Pages
83-93
ISSN
  • 0002-9483 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-8644
DOI
10.1002/ajpa.21550
OpenAlex
W2080452790
Cited by
91
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 8
FWCI
9.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 12 d)
Locations
  • American Journal of Physical Anthropology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • American Museum of Natural History
  • Universität Wien
  • National Museum of Natural History
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
basicranium, endochondral ossification, intramembranous ossification, skull development, homoplasy, cranial evolution, human fossil record, craniometry, microsatellite markers, autosomal markers
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Anthropology, Physical, Cephalometry, Biological Evolution, Female, Genetics, Population, Humans, Male, Skull, Genetic Variation, Microsatellite Repeats, Principal Component Analysis, Racial Groups

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