Ilium growth study: applicability in sex and age diagnosis
Abstract
The use of coxal elements for age and sex diagnosis from the skeleton is the primary and most widespread way of bringing us closer to the identity of dead individuals in archaeological and certain forensic scenarios. Diagnosis in sub-adults, especially in fetus and infant age, is not clear; and further studies are needed. This work presents the analysis of the growth of six variables in the ilium, from birth to 97 years of age, in order to evaluate its significance and its capacity for age and sex determination during and after growth. The materials used were 327 specimens from four documented Western European collections. Growth curves were calculated for the three classical variables of the ilium (width, length and index) and three new variables of the acetabulum area (horizontal and vertical diameter of the ilium acetabular surface and the ilium acetabular index). None of the curves showed a lineal growth, except those of the horizontal diameter of the ilium acetabular surface for the male series. The ilium width has the most complicated growth and it is explained by a four-degree polynomial. All the variables studied can be useful for adult sex discrimination with the exception of the ilium width and ilium acetabular index. Furthermore, the most useful variables for subadult and adult age estimation in archaeological samples, as well as in forensic samples, are the absolute measurements (ilium length and width, horizontal and vertical diameter of the ilium acetabular surf…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Sex differences were deemed insignificant for auricular surface and acetabulum methods by Buckberry and Chamberlain and Rissech and Malgosa, while the pubic symphyseal surface method had distinct age ranges between males and females.
“Although sex differences were deemed insignificant for auricular surface and acetabulum methods by Buckberry and Chamberlain [15] and Rissech and Malgosa [30], the pubic symphyseal surface method had distinct age ranges between males and females [13] (Table 3).”
From Three methods of estimating age‐at‐death using three different regions on the os coxa (2026) · cites this paper as [30]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Three methods of estimating age‐at‐death using three different regions on the os coxa
Mkhonza, S. S., Ngubane, N. P., Aladeyelu, O. S., & Rennie, C. O. (2026) · Journal of Forensic Sciences · doi:10.1111/1556-4029.70219
- Authors
- Rissech, C., & Malgosa, A.
- Venue
- Forensic Science International
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 147
- Issue
- 2-3
- Pages
- 165-174
- ISSN
- 0379-0738
- Cited by
- 62
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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