What we see is what we touch? Sex estimation on the skull in virtual anthropology

4Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The increased use of virtual bone images in forensic anthropology requires a comprehensive study on the observational errors between dry bones and CT reconstructions. Here, we focus on the consistency of nonmetric sex estimation traits on the human skull. Materials and methods: We scored nine nonmetric traits on dry crania and mandibles (n = 223) of archaeological origin and their CT reconstructions. Additionally, we 3D surface scanned a subsample (n = 50) and repeated our observations. Due to the intricate anatomy of the mental eminence, we split it into two separate traits: the bilateral mental tubercles and the midsagittal mental protuberance. We provide illustrations and descriptions for both these traits. Results: We obtained supreme consistency values between the CT and 3D surface modalities. The most consistent cranial traits were the glabella and the supraorbital margin, followed by the nuchal crest, zygomatic extension, mental tubercles, mental protuberance, mental eminence, mastoid process and ramus flexure, in descending order. The mental tubercles show higher consistency scores than the mental eminence and the mental protuberance. Discussion: The increased interchangeability of the virtual modalities with each other as compared to the dry bone modality could be due to the lack of tactility on both the CT and surface scans. Moreover, tactility appears less essential with experience than a precise trait description. Future studies could revolve around the most consistent cranial traits, combining them with pelvic traits from a previous study, to test for accuracy.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Braun, S., Schwendener, N., Kanz, F., Lösch, S., & Milella, M. (2024). What we see is what we touch? Sex estimation on the skull in virtual anthropology. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 138(5), 2113–2125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-024-03244-w

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free