Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine
Volume 17, Issue 6 , Pages 348-351 , August 2010

Sex determination from the acetabulum: test of a possible non-population-specific discriminant function equation

Received 25 September 2009 ,Revised 2 March 2010 ,Accepted 1 April 2010.

References 

  1. Steyn M, Patriquin ML. Osteometric sex determination from the pelvis – does population specificity matter?. Forensic Sci Int. 2009;191:113.e1–113.e5
  2. In:  Buikstra JE,  Ubelaker DH editor. Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Arkansas archeological survey research series. vol. 44:Fayetteville: Arkansas; 1994;Arkansas Archeological Survey
  3. St.Hoyme LE, Íscan MY. Determination of sex and race: accuracy and assumptions. In:  Íscan MY,  Kennedy KAR editor. Reconstruction of life from the skeleton. New York: Alan R. Liss Inc.; 1989;p. 53–93
  4. Rösing FW, Graw M, Marré B, Ritz-Timme S, Rothschild MA, Rötzscher K, et al. Recommendations for the forensic diagnosis of sex and age from skeletons. HOMO – J Comp Hum Biol. 2007;58:75–89
  5. Cardoso HFV. Sample-specific (universal) metric approaches for determining the sex of immature human skeletal remains using permanent tooth dimensions. J Archaeol Sci. 2008;35:158–168
  6. Šlaus M, Tomičić Z. Discriminant function sexing of fragmentary and complete tibiae from medieval Croatian sites. Forensic Sci Int. 2005;147:147–152
  7. Pretorius E, Steyn M, Scholtz Y. Investigation into the usability of geometric morphometric analysis in assessment of sexual dimorphism. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2006;129:64–70
  8. Patriquin ML, Steyn M, Loth SR. Metric analysis of sex differences in South African black and white pelves. Forensic Sci Int. 2005;147:119–127
  9. King CA, Iscan MY, Loth SR. Metric and comparative analysis of sexual dimorphism in the Thai femur. J Forensic Sci. 1998;43:954–958
  10. Albanese J, Cardoso HFV, Saunders SR. Universal methodology for developing univariate sample-specific sex determination methods: an example using the epicondylar breadth of the humerus. J Archaeol Sci. 2005;32:143–152
  11. Steyn M, Íscan MY. Osteometric variation in the humerus: sexual dimorphism in South Africans. Forensic Sci Int. 1999;106:77–85
  12. Ayoub F, Rizk A, Yehya M, Cassia A, Chartouni S, Atiyeh F, et al. Sexual dimorphism of mandibular angle in a Lebanese sample. J Forensic and Leg Med. 2009;16:121–124
  13. Hunnargi SA, Menezes RG, Kanchan T, Lobo SW, Uysal S, Herekar NG, et al. Sternal index: is it a reliable indicator of sex in the Maharashtrian population of India?. J Forensic and Legal Medicine. 2009;16:56–58
  14. Klepinger LL. Fundamentals of forensic anthropology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Liss; 2006;
  15. Komar DA, Buikstra JE. Forensic anthropology: contemporary theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008;
  16. Steyn M, Íscan MY. Metric sex determination from the pelvis in modern Greeks. Forensic Sci Int. 2008;179:86.e1–86.e6
  17. Papaloucas C, Fiska A, Demetriou T. Sexual dimorphism of the hip joint in Greeks. Forensic Sci Int. 2008;179:83.e1–83.e3
  18. Murphy AMC. The acetabulum: sex assessment of prehistoric New Zealand Polynesian innominates. Forensic Sci Int. 2000;108:39–43
  19. Albanese J. A metric method for sex determination using the hipbone and the femur. J Forensic Sci. 2003;48:263–273
  20. Bruzek J, Murail P, Houët F, Cleuvenot E. Inter- and intra-observer error in pelvic measurements and its implication for the methods of sex determination. Anthropologie. 1994;32:215–223
  21. Kelley MA. Sex determination with fragmented skeletal remains. J Forensic Sci. 1979;24:154–158
  22. Takahashi H. Curvature of the greater sciatic notch in sexing the human pelvis. Anthropol Sci. 2006;114:187–191
  23. Dixit SG, Kakar S, Agarwal S, Choudhry R. Sexing of human hip bones of Indian origin by discriminant function analysis. J Forensic Leg Med. 2007;14:429–435
  24. Waldron T. The relative survival of the human skeleton: implications for paleopathology. In:  Boddington A,  Grarland AN,  Janaway RC editor. Death, decay, and reconstruction: approaches to archaeology and forensic science. Manchester: Manchester University Press;; 1987;p. 55–64
  25. MacLaughlin SM, Bruce MF. The sciatic notch/acetabular index as a discriminator of sex in European skeletal remains. J Forensic Sci. 1986;31:1380–1390
  26. Olivier G, Profils sagittaux et mensuration de crânes de Français, in Documentation anthropologique, Laboratoire d’Anthropologie biologique; 1972, Université Paris 7: Paris.
  27. Carre Y, A propos de la biométrie d’une collection de mandibules de Français adultes, in Thesè de Doctorat en Sciences Odontologiques; 1978, Université Paris 7: Paris.
  28. Bruzek J. A method for visual determination of sex, using the human hip bone. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2002;117:157–168
  29. Perini TA, de Oliveira GL, dos Santos Omellas J, de Oliveira FP. Technical error of measurement in anthropometry. Rev Bras Med Esporte. 2005;11:86–90
  30. Gapert R, Black S, Last J. Sex determination from the occipital condyle; discriminant function analysis in an eighteenth and nineteenth century British sample. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2009;138:384–394
  31. Harris EF, Smith RN. Accounting for measurement error: a critical but often overlooked process. Arch Oral Biol. 2008;54:S107–S117
  32. Murail P, Bruzek J, Houët F, Cunha E. DSP: a tool for probabilistic sex diagnosis using worldwide variability in hip-bone measurements. Bull Mém Soc Anthrop Paris. 2005;17:167–176
  33. Bruzek J, Murail P. Methodology and reliability of sex determination from the skeleton. In:  Schmitt A,  Cunha E,  Pinheiro J editor. Forensic anthropology and medicine: complementary sciences from recovery to cause of death. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, Inc.; 2006;p. 225–241

PII: S1752-928X(10)00063-6

doi: 10.1016/j.jflm.2010.04.011

Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine
Volume 17, Issue 6 , Pages 348-351 , August 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution