Patrik Galeta

Technical Note: The Effect of Midshaft Location on the Error Ranges of Femoral and Tibial Cross-sectional Parameters

In comparing long-bone cross-sectional geometric properties between individuals, percentages of bone length are often used to identify equivalent locations along the diaphysis. In fragmentary specimens where bone lengths cannot be measured, however, these locations must be estimated more indirectly. In this study, we examine the effect of inaccurately located femoral and tibial midshafts on estimation of geometric properties. The error ranges were compared on 30 femora and tibiae from the Eneolithic and Bronze Age. Cross-sections were obtained at each 1% interval from 60 to 40% of length using CT scans. Five percent of deviation from midshaft properties was used as the maximum acceptable error. Reliability was expressed by mean percentage differences, standard deviation of percentage differences, mean percentage absolute differences, limits of agreement, and mean accuracy range (MAR) (range within which mean deviation from true midshaft values was less than 5%). On average, tibial cortical area and femoral second moments of area are the least sensitive to positioning error, with mean accuracy ranges wide enough for practical application in fragmentary specimens (MAR = 40-130 mm). In contrast, tibial second moments of area are the most sensitive to error in midshaft location (MAR = 14-20 mm). Individuals present significant variation in morphology and thus in error ranges for different properties. For highly damaged fossil femora and tibiae we recommend carrying out additional tests to better establish specific errors associated with uncertain length estimates.

Modeling neolithic dispersal in Central Europe: Demographic implications

On the basis of new examination of ancient DNA and craniometric analyses, Neolithic dispersal in Central Europe has been recently explained as reflecting colonization or at least a major influx of near eastern farmers. Given the fact that Neolithic dispersal in Central Europe was very rapid and extended into a large area, colonization would have to be associated with high population growth and fertility rates of an expanding Neolithic population. We built three demographic models to test whether the growth and fertility rates of Neolithic farmers were high enough to allow them to colonize Central Europe without admixture with foragers. The principle of the models is based on stochastic population projections. Our results demonstrate that colonization is an unlikely explanation for the Neolithic dispersal in Central Europe, as the majority of fertility and growth rate estimates obtained in all three models are higher than levels expected in the early Neolithic population. On the basis of our models, we derived that colonization would be possible only if (1) more than 37% of women survived to mean age at childbearing, (2) Neolithic expansion in Central Europe lasted more than 150 years, and (3) the population of farmers grew in the entire settled area. These settings, however, represent very favorable demographic conditions that seem unlikely given current archaeological and demographic evidence. Therefore, our results support the view that Neolithic dispersal in Central Europe involved admixture of expanding farmers with local foragers. We estimate that the admixture contribution from foragers may have been between 55% and 72%.

Measuring human remains in the field: Grid technique, total station, or MicroScribe?

Although three-dimensional (3D) coordinates for human intra-skeletal landmarks are among the most important data that anthropologists have to record in the field, little is known about the reliability of various measuring techniques. We compared the reliability of three techniques used for 3D measurement of human remain in the field: grid technique (GT), total station (TS), and MicroScribe (MS). We measured 365 field osteometric points on 12 skeletal sequences excavated at the Late Medieval/Early Modern churchyard in Všeruby, Czech Republic. We compared intra-observer, inter-observer, and inter-technique variation using mean difference (MD), mean absolute difference (MAD), standard deviation of difference (SDD), and limits of agreement (LA). All three measuring techniques can be used when accepted error ranges can be measured in centimeters. When a range of accepted error measurable in millimeters is needed, MS offers the best solution. TS can achieve the same reliability as does MS, but only when the laser beam is accurately pointed into the center of the prism. When the prism is not accurately oriented, TS produces unreliable data. TS is more sensitive to initialization than is MS. GT measures human skeleton with acceptable reliability for general purposes but insufficiently when highly accurate skeletal data are needed. We observed high inter-technique variation, indicating that just one technique should be used when spatial data from one individual are recorded. Subadults are measured with slightly lower error than are adults. The effect of maximum excavated skeletal length has little practical significance in field recording. When MS is not available, we offer practical suggestions that can help to increase reliability when measuring human skeleton in the field.

Spondylosis deformans in three large canids from the Gravettian Předmostí site: Comparison with other canid populations

Spondylosis deformans is a common degenerative condition of the spinal column, especially in modern domestic dogs. The presence and severity of lesions are related to age and physical activity, but they can be influenced by genetics, with some modern breeds being particularly predisposed. Spondylosis deformans also has been reported in prehistoric dogs. Here, we describe three affected vertebrae, likely from three individuals, in a large canid assemblage from the Gravettian Předmostí site, Czech Republic. We compare the proportion of affected individuals from the Předmostí assemblage with that of affected individuals among recent wild Northern wolves, inbred wolves, captive wolves, and recent Northern dogs. The proportion of affected individuals among the captive wolves differs significantly from the other wolf groups. The proportion in the Předmostí assemblage does not differ significantly from that of the wild wolf groups.