Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Res
earc
h in
Phy
sica
l Ant
hrop
olog
y: E
ssay
s in
Hon
or o
f Pro
fess
or L
. S. P
enro
seEdited by
Sudip Datta Banik
Research in Physical Anthropology:Essays in Honor of
Professor L. S. Penrose
About the Book
This scientific volume is edited by Dr. Sudip Datta Banik to pay homage to Professor Lionel Sharples Penrose (11 June 1898 – 12 May 1972). Professor Penrose was a celebrated British psychiatrist, medical geneticist, andmathematician. He is famous for his pioneering work on genetics of mental retardation.
This edited volume has eighteen chapters contributed by eminent scientists in the areas of human genetics, dermatoglyphics and quantitative traits, population studies, health, nutrition and epidemiology and primatology. This book has four sections in its contents. The first section includes re-search papers on methodological issues related to heredity, inbreeding and asymmetry of dermatoglyphics in human populations, application ofPearson’s Coefficient of Racial Likeness (C.R.L.) and Penrose’s Size and Shape statistics to cranial variations of Polynesian origins. The reportsrepresent Indian, Polynesian and Chinese populations.
The second section is focused on dermatoglyphic variations in human populations. Authors contributed research articles on dermatoglyphicsrepresenting Turkmenian population, Hani nationality of China, and popu-lations from Belarus Republic, Cuba, sub-Saharan Africa and Switzerland. Application of dermatoglyphics in diagnosis of diabetes Type 1 has been dis-cussed by a author with reference to a sample from central province of Iran.
In the third section, papers are in the perspectives of human growth epide-miology, health and nutrition. The first article reports on height of children from migrant families from rural areas to Mexico City. The authors have compared the results of their present study with two earlier studies. Two scientists of Canada analyzed the British War Diaries of early 20th century and presented a report on pandemic influenza and sickness among theBritish Expeditionary Forces (BEF) stationed in France and their mortality statistics. In the other chapters, health and nutritional status, of some In-dian tribal populations are discussed.
The fourth section has two papers, contributed by a group of scientists of Central Washington University in USA. In human societies, especially in western cultures, isolation is a common problem for the aged people. How-ever, it also true for the non-human primates. The authors have beautifully portrayed in chapter 17, the changing group behavior patterns with age in the Tibetan macaques (Macaca thibetana) living in Huangshan, Anhui Province, China. In the other chapter, author has reported on duet signing patterns of Black Gibbons (Nomascus concolor jingdongensis) in forests of Xiaobahe in Central Yunnan Province.
Research in Physical Anthropology: Essays in Honor of Profesor L. S. Penrose© 2010 Sudip Datta Banik© 2010 unas letras industria editorial
Published byunas letras industria editorialCalle 64 No. 560 x 71 y 73Centro Histórico C.P. 97000, Mérida, Yucatánwww.unasletras.com
First edition: September, 2010
Disclaimer
The views expressed by the authors in the papers published in this present edited volume are their own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the editor. The editors is in no way responsible for any liability arising out of the contents or any presentation given in the text / information / tables / figures or any part of the papers / articles. Neither the editor nor the publisher will remain responsible for any dispute, controversy and / or legal complications, if they arise in connection with any questioned authenticity, duplication, replication, plagiarism or of its kind, if any etc. in part or as a whole of any paper / article published in this present edited volume.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, xerography, or any information storage and retreieval system, whitout permission in writing from the editor.
Printed in México
Research in Physical Anthropology: Essays in Honor of
Professor L. S. Penrose
Edited bySudip Datta Banik
About the editor
Dr. Sudip Datta BanikM.Sc., Ph.D. FICN (Canada)
Dr. Datta Banik is presently attached as a visiting researcher and faculty (Investigador) in the Departament of Human Ecology at Cinvestav del IPN – Mérida, Yucatán, México.In India he is holding a senior faculty position in the post-graduate department of Anthropology at Vidyasagar Uni-versity in West Bengal, India. He has published thirty-four research articles in journals of international repute and has contributed six chapters in edited volumes. He has edited four scientific volumes. He also act as a peer reviewer for some Indian and international journals.
Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados (Cinvestav)del Instituto Politécnico Nacional (IPN) Mérida
Departamento de Ecología Humana
Antigua carretera a Progreso km. 6 C.P. 97310 Mérida, Yucatán, México
Telephone+52999 942-94-09 (Office)
Fax+52999 981-46-70 (Office)
Email [email protected] [email protected]
[email protected] [email protected]
Acknowledgement
I express my heartfelt gratitude to the distinguished authors of the chapters in this volume.
I avail this opportunity to express my immense gratefulness to my teacher, Dr. D. P. Mukherjee, former Professor of Anthropology, Uni-versity of Calcutta. His valuable suggestions helped me to complete the work successfully. It is also my proud privilege to mention that Professor D.P. Mukherjee did his Ph.D. under Professor L.S. Penrose at Galton Laboratory in London in 1967. So I feel myself fortunate to pay a tribute to Professor Penrose through this work.
We are also thankful to the unas letras industria editorial and especially to Eugenia Montalván Colón for support and co-operation towards the publication of the volume.
Mérida, Yucatán, México 16th September, 2010Sudip Datta Banik
Contents
Section IHeritability Studies and Methods for Analyzing
Quantitative and Dermatoglyphic Traits
Chapter 1 L. S. Penrose and the study of raceMolly K. Zuckerman & George J. Armelagos
Chapter 2 A multivariate analysis of cranial measurements: Fijian and Polynesian relationshipsMichael Pietrusewsky
Chapter 3Degree of inbreeding and fluctuating asymmetry in a subdivided caste of Andhra Pradesh, IndiaB. Mohan Reddy, Alexa Pfeffer, Shilpi Dasgupta, P.V.S. Sirisha, MH Crawford
Chapter 4 Regression formula for palm atd angles and agesZhang Haiguo
Chapter 5Let us get together-the rejoinder of dermatoglyphics, forensic sciences and hand analysis - palmistryCampbell, Edward ED. J.D.
Chapter 6 Qualitative and quantitative finger and palmar dermatoglyphics: Sexual dimorphism in the Turkmenian populationB. Karmakar & E. Kobyliansky
From the editor’s desk
Physical anthropologists study biological variation of human popu-lations in multidisciplinary approach. Human evolution, behavior,heredity, and primate studies are some of the major branches of physi-cal anthropology. Knowledge of society and cultural traditions, migra-tion and environmental issues etc. also help us to understand a human population in holistic fashion. Studies of human ‘race’ or ethnic groups and understanding of human variations were the fundamental investi-gations that were initiated by the physical anthropologists in 18th cen-tury. Johann Friedrich Blumenbach 1752–1840), by Paul Broca (1824–1880), Franz Boas (1858–1942), and Ales Hrdlicka (1869–1943) are some of the great physical anthropologists. There are many renowned scientists who directly or indirectly contributed their work in different areas of physical anthropology and human biology in last centuries.
Professor Lionel Sharples Penrose was a medical geneticist andpsychiatrist. His “The Biology of Mental Defect”, published bySidgwick and Jackson Ltd., London, U.K. in 1949 is a classical hand-book to every researcher. He was elected as the Fellow of the Royal Society in 1953 and the Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of London in 1962. Professor Penrose was the Galton Chair Professor of Eugenics and the Director of the Galton Laboratory at University College of London during 1945 to 1965. In 1963, he received the pres-tigious international award of the Joseph P. Kennedy (Jr.) Foundation for his pioneering research on mental retardation and he established the famous Kennedy-Galton Centre for Mental Deficiency Research and Diagnosis. He was the Emeritus Professor of Human Genetics in the University of London, Kennedy-Galton Centre, Harperbury Hos-pital, St.Albans. Laxova (1998) beautifully portrayed a biography of Professor Penrose.
These are only a few words to pay my homage to Professor L. S.Penrose. I am fortunate that the eminent scientists have given me the opportunity to enrich myself through their esteemed contributions in this volume.
Sudip Datta Banik
Reference: Laxova Renata (1998) Lionel Sharples Penrose, 1898–1972: A Personal Memoir in Celebration of the Centenary of His Birth. Genetics 150: 1333–1340
11
37
67
89
97
115
Section II Dermatoglyphic Variation in Human Populations
Chapter 7Application of Dermatoglyphic Traits for Diagnosis of Diabetic Type 1 PatientsHossein Rezaei Nezhad & Nasser Mahdavi Shahri
Chapter 8Hani nationality dermatoglyphics in ChinaZhang Haiguo
Chapter 9Dermatoglyphics in the complex researches of Belarus Republic populationL.I. Tegako
Chapter 10Dermatoglyphic traits of sub-Saharan African subjectsP.S. Igbigbi
Chapter 11Canary Islands origin of the Hypothenar radial arch in Cuban familiesMayra Hernández Iglesias & Liane Borbolla Vacher
Chapter 12Dermatoglyphics in the population of Cugy (Switzerland)Floris Giovanni
Chapter 13Height growth of children from popular neighbourhoods of Mexico CityJavier Rosique Gracia & Julieta Aréchiga Viramontes
Section IIIEpidemiology, Healt and Nutrition
Chapter 14Influenza among British expeditionary forces in France, 1916-1918D. Ann Herring & Janet Padiak
Chapter 15Nutritional status influencing body structure and functions among Saharia - a primitive tribe of Central IndiaSatwanti Kapoor & A.K. Kapoor
Chapter 16 Nutritional Status and Morbidity Pattern among Jenu Kuruba Children of Mysore District, KarnatakaS.C. Jai Prabhakar & M.R. Gangadhar
Section IV Studies of Non-Human Primate
Chapter 17A Preliminary Analysis of Aging and Potential SocialPartners in Tibetan Macaques (Macaca thibetana)Lori K. Sheeran, Megan D. Matheson, Jinhua Li,R. Steven Wagner
Chapter 18Lack of Seasonal Influence on Duet Duration in Black Gibbons (Nomascus concolor jingdongensis)Lori K. Sheerant
147
159
177
193
247
255
261
287
303
325
349
359
36 37
Stone D (2001) Race in British Eugenics. European History Quarterly 31(3):397-425.
Thomson A (1903) A Consideration of Some of the More Important Factors Concerned in the Production of Man’s Cranial Form.Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 33:135-166.
Trapper M (1995) Interrogating bodies: Medico-racial knowledge, politics and the study of a disease. Comparative Study of Society and History I:76-93.
Trapper M (1998) In The Blood: Sickle Cell Anemia and the Politicsof Race. Philadelphia: University of Pennslvania Press.
Tredgold AF (1929) Mental deficiency (amentia). New York: W. Wood and company.
UNESCO (1950) The Race Question: UNESCO.— (1952) The race concept; results of an inquiry. Paris: UNESCO.
Watt DC (1998) L. S. Penrose FRS (1898-1972). Psychiatrist and professor of human genetics. British Journal of Psychiatry173:458-61.
Wolstenholme GEW, Porter R, eds. (1967) Mongolism, Ciba Founda-tion Study Group Number 25. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.
Chapter 2
A multivariate analysis of cranial measurements: Fijian and Polynesian relationships
Michael PietrusewskyDepartment of Anthropology
University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.
Abstract
There is a long history of studies in physical/biological anthropology that have focused on Polynesian origins using cranial variation. This chapter begins with a brief history of multivariate statistical proce-dures including Pearson’s Coefficient of Racial Likeness (C.R.L.) and Penrose’s Size and Shape statistics, precursors to more advanced mul-tivariate procedures such as Mahalanobis’ D2. A few examples of the application of these earlier statistical procedures to craniometric data for understanding the population history of the Pacific are given. The main focus of this chapter is the application of applying stepwise dis-criminant function analysis and Mahalanobis’ D2 to 19 cranial measure-ments recorded in male crania from site VL 16/1 at Sigatoka, Fiji (1820 ± 90 BP) and 32 additional near modern cranial series from the Pacific and Asia for understanding the population history of this region. The results of this analysis indicate that Sigatoka crania are closest to other Melanesian (e.g., Fiji, New Caledonia, Loyalty Islands, and Vanuatu) cranial series suggesting extensive contact between Fiji and geographi-cal island Melanesia had already occurred by the third century A.D.
Keywords: Penrose size and shape, CRL, Mahalanobis’ generalized distance, discriminant function analysis, Sigatoka, Fiji.
Introduction
W.W. Howells (1997) remarked that studies in physical anthropology, which up until the mid-nineteenth century had been primarily (often intricate) exercises in typological racial classification, were transformed
38 39
by two important changes, namely the use of genetic traits and ad-vances in statistical analysis. The giant breakthrough in statistics was the development of a class of statistical methods known as multivari-ate analysis; a family of related mathematical procedures that, among other things, allowed the simultaneous analysis of multiple variables (i.e., measurements) and the removal of intercorrelation among the variables. The use of these advanced statistical methods was facilitated by the accessibility and availability of high-speed computers. Although multivariate procedures had been formulated earlier, the extensive hand calculations made computation of this category of statistical proce-dures formidable without the use of a computer.
Much of the transformation in statistics in anthropology can be traced to the work of Karl Pearson at the Biometric Laboratory, Univer-sity College, London. An early precursor of multivariate statistics was Pearson’s Coefficient of Racial Likeness--CRL (Pearson, 1926, 1928), which Pearson and his followers began to apply to studies of skulls for investigating population history. Another early attempt at devising an easier way to calculate a measure of biological distance were the Size and Shape statistics introduced by Penrose (1954). However, as was soon demonstrated, both the CRL and Penrose’s Size and Shape sta-tistics had a number of inadequacies when used as measures of group divergence. Most notably, neither statistic sufficiently allowed for the intercorrelation of the variables (measurements), number of measure-ments used, differences in sample size, or a way to test for significance. Despite these obstacles and even Pearson’s cautionary note that CRL was not a measure of morphometric distance (Pearson, 1926:105), the relative ease of calculating these statistics, especially Penrose’s size and shape, attracted many earlier (e.g., von Bonin, 1931, 1936; Wagner, 1937) as well as later devotees, including some recent work in Pacific craniometry (e.g., Katayama, 1987, 1994; Houghton, 1989, 2008).
Interpretations of population history in the Pacific based on CRL and similar statistics resulted in often confusing and spurious results. For example, Wagner (1937) made use of the CRL in analyzing crani-ometric data for a number of Pacific island series available to him at that time. In one such analysis, Wagner remarked,
“It appears, also, that the Moriori are closer to the Marquesans and Society Islanders than to their immediate neighbours, the Maori…” (Wagner, 1937:129); and
“In general, the coefficients… show an interesting agreement with the geographical relations, but they also lead to surprises which demand special attention.” (Wagner, 1937:129).
The statistical shortcomings of CRL were soon overcome with the introduction of Mahalanobis’ D2, or generalized distance (Mahalanobis, 1930, 1936; Mahalanobis et al; 1949). This statistic, which corrected for intercorrelation of variables and allowed the handling of large number of variables simultaneously as well as testing of significance, remains the gold standard for measuring biological distance based on metrical and phenotypic data.
Pietrusewsky’s doctoral dissertation research (Pietrusewsky, 1969a, 1969b) used both Penrose’s Size and Shape statistics and Mahalanobis’ D2 for understanding biological relationships of Polynesian cranial se-ries, but subsequent work abandoned the use of the Size and Shape sta-tistics. Results obtained using Mahalanobis’ D2 found that the Moriori (Chatham Islanders) were more closely related to the New Zealand Maori and Marquesans in contrast to results reported by Wagner using CRL (Pietrusewsky, 1970). Likewise, the D2 results indicated close simi-larity between Hawaiians and New Zealand Maori, which contradicted the results found using CRL (Pietrusewsky, 1970). It should be noted, however, that Wagner, who was one of the first to apply the CRL to craniometric data from the Pacific, cautioned readers in accepting the results based on this statistic (Wagner, 1937:143).
Despite these and more recent warnings, studies (some very recent) that use Penrose’s Size and Shape statistics for understanding biological relationships of Pacific Islanders continue to appear in the literature. Examples of the application of Penrose’s Size and Shape statistics in-clude Houghton’s analysis of skeletal and dental remains from Watom Island (Houghton, 1989) and Tuamako Islands, a Polynesian outlier in the Solomon Islands (Houghton, 2008) and Katayama’s work involving Cook Island and other Polynesian series (Katayama, 1987, 1994). For
40 41
a more detailed discussion of the failings of these earlier multivariate statistical procedures, including criticism of work in the Pacific region that used these crude measures of divergence, readers are directed to Buranarugsa and Leach (1993).
In this paper multivariate statistical procedures, stepwise discrimi-nant function analysis and Mahalanobis’ generalized distance, are ap-plied to measurements recorded in six of the most complete male cra-nia from the prehistoric site of Sigatoka, located in Fiji, for assessing the biological relationships of prehistoric Fijians and neighboring Pa-cific and Asian groups.
Sigatoka Skeletal Series
Archaeological excavations in the 1970s found extensive evidence of occupation surfaces including some human skeletal remains at the Si-gatoka sand dunes site (Site VL 16/1) located at the mouth of the Sigatoka River on the southwestern coast of Viti Levu, Republic of Fiji (Birks, 1973). In 1987 and 1988 the remains of approximately 55 individuals, which have been dated to 1820 ± 90 BP, were excavated by Simon Best at the VL 16/1 site (Best, 1987, 1989), making this one of the largest samples of archaeological human skeletal remains from Fiji. The Sigatoka skeletons post-date the earliest inhabitants of Fiji who were associated with the Lapita cultural tradition (2900 - 2950 BP) (Kirch, 1997). Fiji, which lies at the boundary of eastern Melanesia and western Polynesia, is further believed to have been initially settled by Austronesian speaking people who were the direct antecedents of the present day Polynesians. The time when the burial mound at Sigatoka was being used coincides with a critical period in Fiji’s prehistory, a time when major intrusions of people from the west (Melanesians) are believed to have been taking place (Best, 1989).
The excavations reveal the presence of a structured cemetery in-cluding 20 cairns of rock and coral and several multiple interments. The extreme uniformity in burial pattern, including alignment in an east-west direction with the heads to the west and legs flexed or semi-flexed, and differential elevation of the burials suggest use of the cem-etery at Sigatoka by a highly stratified society (Best 1989:52-58). The
apparent hierarchical ranking of the burials at this site further indicates the possibility that many of the individuals buried in the Sigatoka dunes were related during life (Best, 1989:53-54). In addition, the presence of multiple burials, containing two or three individuals laid side by side suggests the possibility of ritualized killing of wives as was observed and documented historically in Fiji (Best, 1989: 53-55).
Comparative Cranial Series
In addition to the crania from Sigatoka, this study includes comparative data recorded in 32 cranial series from Polynesia, Melanesia, Micro-nesia, Australia, islands and mainland Southeast Asia, East Asia and Mongolia. The approximate place of origin of these series, where the specimens were examined and other information are given in Table 1 and Figure 1. Sample size ranges from 12 to 62. To insure some even-ness of sample size, the maximum number of specimens for most of these groups has been limited to approximately 50 individuals. All data were recorded by the author using complete or nearly complete adult male specimens. The methods for determining age at death and sex follow those described in Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994), Pietrusewsky and Douglas (2002), and White (2000).
Cranial Measurements
Nineteen measurements, which are similar to those of Martin and Saller (1957) and Howells (1973, 1989), are used in the present study (Table 2). This number represents the largest set of measurements for which reliable data could be recorded in the Sigatoka specimens and the comparative series. Missing measurements, which were minimal, were replaced with the regressed values obtained through stepwise re-gression analysis using the computer program, PAM, of the BMDP-7M computer programs (Dixon and Brown, 1979).
Multivariate Statistical Procedures
Two multivariate statistical procedures, stepwise discriminant function analysis and Mahalanobis’ generalized distance statistic, or D2 (Ma-halanobis, 1936), were applied to a total of 19 standard cranial mea-
42 43
surements recorded in male crania in this study. A more detailed discus-sion of these methods is provided by Pietrusewsky (2008b).
Stepwise Discriminant Function (Canonical) Analysis
The major purpose of discriminant function, or canonical, analysis is to maximize differences between groups (to maximize the ratio of between-group variance to total variance) by producing a linear array of weighted variables, referred to as discriminant functions or canoni-cal variates, from the original measurements (Tatsuoka, 1971). Typi-cally, the first few canonical variates account for most of the variation among the groups. In this analysis, the original measurements were selected in a stepwise manner such that, at each step, the measurement that adds most to the separation of the groups was the one entered into the discriminant function in advance of the others (Dixon and Brown, 1979:711). This procedure allows identification of those variables that are most responsible for the observed differentiation between individ-uals of the various groups. Interpretations of discriminant functions and the patterns of group separation are based on an inspection of standardized canonical coefficient values or discriminant coefficients.
At the end of the stepping process, each individual specimen is clas-sified into one of the original groups based on the discriminant scores it receives through the calculation of posterior (regular classification) and/or typicality (jackknifed classification) probabilities (Van Vark and Schaafsma, 1992:244-255). Jackknifed classification represents a com-mon cross-validation procedure in multiple discriminant analysis, where cases are classified without using misclassified individuals in computing the classification function. The results of ‘correct’ and ‘incorrect’ clas-sifications provide a general guide for assessing the homogeneity or heterogeneity of the original series. Only the jackknifed classification results are discussed in presenting the results of this analysis. Another useful feature of stepwise discriminant function analysis is that it al-lows group means to be plotted on the first few canonical variates, thus allowing a visualization of intergroup relationships. The computer program BMDP-7M (Dixon and Brown, 1979) was used to perform the stepwise discriminant function analysis, while two-dimensional and three-dimensional plots were made using the SYGRAPH module of
SYSTAT (Wilkinson, 1992).
Mahalanobis’ Generalized Distance – D2
Mahalanobis’ D2, or the sum of squared differences, provides a single quantitative measure of dissimilarity (distance) between groups using multiple variables while removing the correlation between the variables (Mahalanobis, 1936). The significance of these distances was deter-mined using the method of Rao (1952:245), a procedure recommend-ed by Buranarugsa and Leach (1993:17).
The average linkage within group clustering algorithm, or Un-weighted Pair Group Method Algorithm (UPGMA) (Sneath and Sokal, 1973), was the clustering procedure used to construct the diagrams of relationship, or dendrograms, using Mahalanobis’ distances. The UP-GMA algorithm combines clusters so that the average distance among all cases in the resulting cluster is as small as possible and the distance between two clusters is taken to be the average among all possible pairs of cases in the cluster. The NTSYS-pc computer software program was used to construct the dendrograms (Rohlf, 1993).
Results
The results of applying stepwise discriminant function analysis and Mahalanobis’ generalized distance to 19 cranial measurements record-ed in 1458 male crania are presented in this section.
Stepwise Discriminant Analysis
A summary of the measurements (Table 2), ranked according to the F-values [tests of equality of group means using classical one-way analysis of variance] received in the final step of discriminant function analysis provides an indication of the discriminatory power of the original vari-ables. All values are significant at the 1% level. The variables that con-tribute most to this analysis include maximum cranial breadth, alveolar length, basion-nasion length, nasion-prosthion height, and maximum cranial length.
44 45
Eigenvalues, which represent the amount of variance accounted for by each function or variate, expressed as the percentage of total disper-sion, and level of significance (Rao, 1952:323) for the first ten canonical variates is presented in Table 3. The eigenvalues provide an indication of the proportion of dispersion accounted for by each canonical vari-ate. In this analysis, the first three canonical variates account for 67% of the total variation. The first ten eigenvalues are significant at the 1% level, indicating significant heterogeneity for these canonical variates.
Canonical coefficients, those values by which an individual’s mea-surements may be multiplied to obtain its score, for 19 measurements, for the first three canonical variates are presented next (Table 4). Group separation on the first canonical variate is primarily the result of vari-ation in the length of the hard palate (alveolar length), facial height (cheek height), angulation of the medial margins of the orbits (nasio-frontal subtense), facial height (nasion-prosthion height) and the length of the cranial base (basion-nasion). The correlations are generally weak and two of the five most important discriminators are negatively cor-related. This function can be described as a palate length, and facial height discriminator. The second canonical variate is responsible for group separation primarily on the basis of differences in the length of the cranial base, interorbital breadth, breadth of the nasal aperture, and palate breadth. This variate is thus a cranial base length and mid-facial breadth discriminator. Group separation on the third variate is primar-ily due to differences in frontal chord length, maximum cranial length, nasal breadth and malar size.
A plot of the group means on the first two canonical variates, which account for approximately 59% of the total variation, is presented in Figure 2. The cranial series generally group into one of four major constellations. Most of the Melanesian and Australian cranial series, including the Sigatoka series, occupy one of these major groupings. Island and mainland Southeast Asian series form a second constella-tion while the East Asian series form a third. Finally, the Polynesian and Guam cranial series form a loose affiliation. Mongolia and Jomon occupy outlier positions in this representation.
Given the restriction of space, the complete results of group clas-sification obtained in this discriminant function analysis are not pre-sented. Overall, the total percentage of cases correctly classified in the jackknifed classification results is extremely low, 39%. The correct clas-sification results obtained for Sigatoka are among the poorest (17%) in this analysis. Only one of Sigatoka specimens is (correctly) re-assigned to this group. Two of the Sigatoka specimens are re-classified to Fiji and one each is classified as Vanuatu, Tahiti, and Ainu. A single speci-men each is re-classified as Sigatoka for 5 Polynesian and 4 Melanesian series.
Mahalanobis’ D2
The diagram of relationship that results when the Unweighted Pair Group Method (UPGMA) of cluster analysis is applied to Mahalano-bis’ generalized distance is presented in Figure 3. In this diagram, Siga-toka forms a close connection with Vanuatu and then Fiji, a grouping which is part of a larger constellation composed of cranial series from Melanesia and Australia. With the exception of the Admiralty Islands series, the second major grouping evident in this diagram contains the cranial series from East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Polynesia. The Ainu and Jomon form a close association, which together with Mongolia are outliers of this Asian-Polynesian division.
Although the distances (not presented here) obtained for the Siga-toka series are relatively large, the groups closest to Sigatoka include the cranial series from Fiji, Admiralty Islands, Ryukyu Islands, New Zealand (Maori), and Tahiti.
Discussion and conclusions
Dumont d’Urville (1832) was one of the first to observe that Fijians possess phenotypic and cultural characteristics similar to Melanesians to the west, similarities they share as a result of long term contact with the inhabitants of central Melanesia. For that reason Dumont d’Urville categorized Fijians as Melanesian rather than Polynesian despite the geographic proximity to western Polynesia and the fact that the first inhabitants of the Fiji Islands were associated with the Lapita cultural
46 47
complex, the presumed antecedents of Polynesians and other remote Oceanic peoples. Although archaeologists who have worked in Fiji have voiced some opposition ( See a recent review of these by Burley, 2005) Best’s analysis of decorative elements found in ceramic assem-blages associated with the Sigatoka sand dune burials strongly suggests contact with the west (Best, 1989).
As demonstrated in previous analyses of craniometric data (e.g., Pietrusewsky, 1990, 1994, 2005, 2006a, 2006b, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2010) the new multivariate analyses presented in this chapter, which include crania from the Sigatoka sand dunes in Fiji, demonstrate the presence of two major divisions representing the indigenous inhabit-ants of Oceania. The Sigatoka sample aligns with cranial series from geographical Melanesia and Australia, which together represent one of these major divisions. The cranial series from Guam and Polynesia oc-cupy a separate branch of a second larger Asian-Polynesian division. The initial inhabitants of Fiji were associated with the Lapita cultural horizon, the presumed ancestors of modern day inhabitants of Polyne-sia and Remote Oceania (Green, 1997; Kirch, 1997). However, in this study the Sigatoka (which post-date Lapita deposits) and near modern Fijian cranial series show little resemblance to the indigenous inhabit-ants of Polynesia and Micronesia, a finding that differs substantially from that reached by Visser in his study of the Sigatoka skeletal re-mains (Visser, 1994:ii). These results, supporting both the more recent work of Best and early observations of Dumont d’Urville, indicate that there had been extensive contact between later prehistoric inhabit-ants of Fiji and the inhabitants of geographical Melanesia by the third century A.D.
Acknowledgment
The skeletal remains from Sigatoka, Fiji were examined by the author and Michele Toomay Douglas in the Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand in 1992. My thanks to Edward Visser and Philip Houghton and the De-partment of Anatomy and Structural Biology, University of Otago, who facilitated this study. Permission to examine cranial series presented in this study are acknowledged elsewhere (e.g., Pietrusewsky 1990, 1992,
1995; Pietrusewsky et al., 1992). Financial support for this research was provided by the Richard Loundsbery Foundation (New York) and the University of Hawaii (Honolulu).
References
Best SB (1987) A preliminary report on the Sigatoka burials.Domodomo 3: 2-15
Best SB (1989) The Sigatoka dune burials. Unpublished report on file with the Fiji Museum, Suva
Birks L (1973) Archaeological excavations at Sigatoka dune site, Fiji Bulletin No 1. Fiji Museum, Suva
Buikstra JE, Ubelaker DH eds. (1994) Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Arkansas Archaeological Survey Research Series No 44. Arkansas Archaeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas
Buranarugsa M, Leach DP (1993) Coordinate geometry of Morioricrania and comparisons with Maori. Man and Culture inOceania 9:1-43
Dixon WJ, Brown MB, eds. (1979) Biomedical computer programsP-series. University of California Press, Berkley
Dumont d’Urville MJ (1832) Notice sur les îles du Grand Océanet ur l’origine des peuples qui les habitent. Société de GéographieBulletin 17: 1–21
Green RC (1997) Linguistic, biological and cultural origins of theinitial inhabitants of Remote Oceania. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 17 (1995):5-27
Houghton P (1989) Watom: the people. Records of the AustralianMuseum 41: 223-233
48 49
Houghton P (2008) The people of Namu. In Leach F, Davidson J, Archaeology on Taumako, A Polynesian outlier in the easternSolomon Islands. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology SpecialPublication, Dunedin, New Zealand, 325-352
Howells WW (1973) Cranial variation in man. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol 67, Cambridge,Massachusetts
Howells WW (1989) Skull shapes and the map. Craniometric analyses in the dispersion of modern Homo. Papers of the PeabodyMuseum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol 79, Cambridge,Massachusetts
Howells WW (1997) Oceania. In Spencer F ed. History of physical anthropology. Garland Publishing. Inc., New York, 762-775
Katayama K (1987) Physical anthropology in Polynesia: Japanesecontribution. Man and Culture in Oceania 3 Special Issue: 1-18
Katayama K (1994) Biological affinities between southern CookIslanders and New Zealand Maori: Implications for the settlement of New Zealand. In Sutton DG ed. The origins of the first NewZealanders. Auckland University Press, Auckland, 230-242
Kirch PV (1997) The Lapita Peoples: ancestors of the Oceanic world. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford
Koganei Y (1893-94) Beiträge zur physische Anthropologies der Aino. Mittheilungen aus d. Medizinischen Fakultät der Kaiser. Jap.Universität, Tokyo
Li C (1977) Anyang. University of Washington Press, Seattle
Mahalanobis PC (1930) On tests and measures of group divergence. J. Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal 26:541-588
Mahalanobis PC (1936) On the generalized distance in statistics.Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences Calcutta 2:49-55
Mahalanobis PC (1949) Historical note on the D² statistic. InMahalanobis PC, Majumdar DN, Rao CR eds. Anthropometricsurvey of the united provinces, 1941: a statistical study. Sankhya 9 (2,3) Appendix 1, 237-240
Mahalanobis PC, Rao CR (1949) A note on the use of indices. In Mahalanobis PC, Majumdar DN, Rao CR eds. Anthropometric survey of the united provinces, 1941: a statistical study. Sankhya 9 (2, 3) Appendix 2, 240-246
Martin R, Saller K (1957) Lehrbuch der anthropologie. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart
Pearson K (1926) On the coefficient of racial likeness. Biometrika 18: 105-117
Pearson K (1928) Note on the standardization of method of using the coefficient of racial likeness. Biometrika 20: 376-378
Penrose LS (1954) Distance size and shape. Annals of Eugenics 18: 337-345
Pietrusewsky M (1969a) The physical anthropology of early Tongan populations: a study of bones and teeth and an assessment of theirbiological affinities based on cranial comparisons with eight otherPacific populations. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto
Pietrusewsky M (1969b) An osteological study of cranial andinfracranial remains from Tonga. Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum 6(4-6):287-402
Pietrusewsky (1970) An osteological view of indigenous populationsin Oceania. In Green RC, Kelly M eds. Studies in oceanic culture history. Pacific Anthropological Records, No. 11 Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, 1-11
50 51
Pietrusewsky M (1990) Craniofacial variation in Australasian andPacific populations. Am J Phys Anthropol 82:319-340
Pietrusewsky M (1992) Japan, Asia and the Pacific: a multivariatecraniometric investigation. In Hanihara K ed. Japanese as aMember of the Asian and Pacific Populations, InternationalResearch Center for Japanese Studies, Kyoto. InternationalSymposium No. 4, 9-52
Pietrusewsky M (1994) Pacific-Asian relationships: a physicalanthropological perspective. Oceanic Linguistics 33(2):407-430
Pietrusewsky M (1995) Taiwan aboriginals, Asians and PacificIslanders: a multivariate investigation of skulls. In Li P J-k, Tsang C-h, Huang Y-k, Ho D-a, and Tseng C-y eds. Austronesian studies relating to Taiwan. Taipei: Symposium Series of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, Vol. 3:295-351
Pietrusewsky M (2005) The physical anthropology of the Pacific, East Asia, and Southeast Asia: A multivariate craniometric analysis. In Sargat L, Blench R, Sanchez-Mazas A eds. The peopling of East Asia: Putting together archaeology, linguistics, and genetics. RoutledgeCurzon, London, 203-231
Pietrusewsky M (2006a) The initial settlement of remote Oceania: the evidence from physical anthropology. In Simanjuntak T, Pojoh, IHE, Hisyam M eds. Austronesian diaspora and the ethnogenesis of people in Indonesian Archipelago. Proceedings of the International Symposium, Jakarta, Indonesian Institute of Sciences,LIPI Press, Jakarta, 320-347
Pietrusewsky M (2006b) Chapter 3. A multivariate craniometric study of the prehistoric and modern inhabitants of Southeast Asia, East Asia, and surrounding regions: a human kaleidoscope? InOxenham MR, Tayles N eds. Bioarchaeology of Southeast Asia. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 59-90
Pietrusewsky M (2008a) The modern inhabitants of Island Southeast Asia: a craniometric perspective. In Indriati E ed. Proceedings of the international seminar on Southeast Asian paleoanthropology: Recent advances on Southeast Asian paleoanthropology andarchaeology. Laboratory of Bioanthropology and Paleoanthropology, Faculty of Medicine Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 185-201
Pietrusewsky M (2008b) Metric analysis of skeletal remains: methods and applications. In Katzenberg, MA, Saunders SR eds. Biological anthropology of the human skeleton, 2nd edition. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, 487-532.
Pietrusewsky M (2008c) Craniometric variation in Southeast Asia and neighboring regions: a multivariate analysis of cranial measurements.Hum Evol 23 (1-2):49-86.
Pietrusewsky M (2010) A multivariate analysis of measurementsrecorded in early and more modern crania from East Asia and Southeast Asia. Quaternary International 111: 42-54.
Pietrusewsky M, Douglas MT (2002) Ban Chiang, A prehistoric site in Northeast Thailand. I: The human skeletal remains. Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Pietrusewsky M, Li Y, Shao X-q, and Nguyen QQ (1992) Modern and near-modern populations of Asia and the Pacific: a multivariate craniometric interpretation In Akazawa T, Aoki K, Kimura T eds. The evolution and dispersal of modern humans in Asia. Hokusen-sha Publishing Co., Tokyo, 531-558.
Rao CR (1952) Advanced statistical methods in biomedical research. John Wiley, New York.
Rohlf FJ (1993) NTSYS-PC. Numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system, version 1.80.: Exeter software, Setauket, NewYork.
52 53
Sneath PHA, Sokal RR (1973) Numerical taxonomy. Freeman, San Francisco.
Tatsuoka MM (1971) Multivariate analysis: techniques for educational and psychological research. John Wiley and Sons, New York
Van Vark GN, Schaafsma W. (1992) Advances in the quantitativeanalysis of skeletal morphology. In Katzenberg MA, Saunders SR eds. Skeletal biology of past peoples: research methods. Wiley-Liss, New York, 225-257.
Visser E. (1994) The prehistoric people from Sigatoka: An analysis of skeletal and dental traits as evidence of adaptation. Ph.D. dissertation. Otago University, Dunedin.
Von Bonin F. (1931) A contribution to the craniology of the Easter Islanders. Biometrika 23:249-270.
Von Bonin F. (1936) On the craniology of Oceania. Crania from New Britain. Biometrika 28:123-147.
Wagner K (1937) The craniology of the Oceanic races. Skrifter utgitt av det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi i Oslo. I. Mat. – Naturv. Klasse. No 2.
White, T.D. (2000) Human Osteology, 2nd edition. Academic Press, New York.
Wilkinson L (1992) Systat for windows, version 5. Systat, Inc, Evanston, Illinois. T
able
1. T
hirt
y-tw
o co
mpa
rativ
e m
ale
cran
ial s
erie
s us
edin
the
pres
ent s
tudy
Sam
ple
(abb
revi
atio
ns)
No.
of
Cra
nia
Loca
tion1
and
Num
ber
Rem
arks
Eas
t Asi
aSh
angh
ai, C
hina
(SH
A)
50SH
A-5
0T
he s
peci
men
s ar
e m
ostly
from
pos
t-Q
ing
(pre
-191
1) c
emet
erie
s in
Sh
angh
ai.
Any
ang
(AN
Y)
56T
PE-5
6B
ronz
e-ag
e (1
1th
cent
ury
B.C
.) Sh
ang
Dyn
asty
cra
nia
exca
vate
d fr
om
‘sacr
ifici
al p
its’ a
t Any
ang,
Hen
an P
rovi
nce,
nor
ther
n C
hina
(Li,
1977
).A
taya
l(A
TY
)36
The
spe
cim
ens
are
Ata
yal,
the
seco
nd la
rges
t sur
vivi
ng A
borig
inal
tr
ibe
in T
aiw
an, s
lain
in th
e W
ushe
inci
dent
in 1
930.
The
spe
cim
ens
wer
e co
llect
ed b
y Ta
keo
Kan
asek
i in
1932
(How
ells,
198
9:10
9).
Man
chur
ia (M
AN
)50
TK
O-5
0M
any
of th
e sp
ecim
ens
are
from
nor
thea
ster
n C
hina
, a re
gion
for-
mer
ly re
ferr
ed to
as
“Man
chur
ia,”
whi
ch to
day
incl
udes
Hei
long
jiang
an
d Jil
in P
rovi
nces
and
adj
acen
t reg
ions
of
nort
hern
Kor
ea. A
gre
at
man
y of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
iden
tified
as
sold
iers
or c
aval
rym
en
who
die
d in
bat
tle in
the
late
19t
h ce
ntur
y A
.D.
54 55
Kor
ea(K
OR
)32
KY
O-7
;SE
N-3
; T
KM
-2; T
KO
-20
Spec
ific
loca
tions
in K
orea
are
kno
wn
for m
ost o
f th
ese
near
mod
-er
n sp
ecim
ens.
Mon
golia
(MO
G)
50SI
M-5
0T
he s
kulls
are
iden
tified
as
com
ing
from
Ula
anba
atar
(Urg
a), M
on-
golia
, whi
ch w
ere
purc
hase
d by
Ale
š H
rdlik
a in
191
2 fo
r the
Nat
iona
l M
useu
m o
f N
atur
al H
isto
ry in
Was
hing
ton,
D.C
.K
anto
, Jap
an(K
AN
)50
CH
B-5
0A
dis
sect
ing
room
sam
ple
of m
oder
n Ja
pane
se fr
om th
e K
anto
Dis
-tr
ict o
f ea
ster
n H
onsh
u. T
he m
ajor
ity o
f th
e in
divi
dual
s w
ere
born
du
ring
the
Mei
ji pe
riod
(186
8-19
11) a
nd m
ost d
ied
wel
l bef
ore
1940
.Jo
mon
(JO
M)
51T
KO
-16;
NSM
-19
;K
YO
-15;
SAP-
1
All
spec
imen
s re
pres
ent L
ate
to L
ates
t Jom
on s
ites
on H
onsh
u Is
land
. The
larg
est s
erie
s ar
e E
bish
ima
(11)
in I
wat
e Pr
efec
ture
in
Toho
ku D
istr
ict a
nd T
suku
mo
(12)
, Oka
yam
a Pr
efec
ture
in th
e C
hugo
ku D
istr
ict.
Ain
u(A
IN)
50SA
P-18
;T
KM
-5;
TK
O-2
7
Mod
ern
to n
ear m
oder
n sk
elet
ons
colle
cted
by
Yosh
ikiy
o K
ogan
ei
in 1
888-
89 fr
om a
band
oned
Ain
u ce
met
erie
s in
Hok
kaid
o (K
ogan
ei,
1893
-189
4).
Ryu
kyu
Isla
nds
(RY
U)
62K
YU
-34;
KY
O-
18;
TK
O-1
0
Spec
imen
s ar
e fr
om th
e Sa
kish
ima
(13)
, Oki
naw
a (1
3) a
nd A
mam
i (3
0) g
roup
s, re
spec
tivel
y. Si
x m
ore
are
iden
tified
onl
y as
Ryu
kyu
Isla
nd.
Mai
nlan
d So
uthe
ast A
sia
Vie
tnam
(VT
N)
49H
CM
-49
Nea
r mod
ern
cran
ia fr
om H
anoi
(Van
Die
n C
emet
ery)
and
Ho
Chi
M
inh
City
in V
ietn
am.
Cam
bodi
a &
La
os(C
AM
)
40PA
R-4
0A
com
bine
d sa
mpl
e of
cra
nia
from
var
ious
loca
tions
in C
ambo
dia
(11)
and
Lao
s (2
9) c
olle
cted
bet
wee
n 18
77 a
nd 1
920.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
Tha
iland
(TH
I)50
SIR
-50
Mos
t of
the
spec
imen
s re
pres
ent d
isse
ctin
g ro
om in
divi
dual
s fr
om
Ban
gkok
.
Isla
nd S
outh
east
Asi
aPh
ilipp
ines
(PH
L)28
BE
R-9
; DR
E-1
9M
ost s
peci
men
s ar
e fr
om L
uzon
Isl
and.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
56 57
Less
er S
unda
Is
land
s(L
SN)
45BA
S-5;
BE
R-6
; B
LU-2
; CH
A-1
; D
RE
-17;
LE
P-1;
PAR
-6;Z
UR
-7
Cra
nia
from
Bal
i, Fl
ores
, Sum
ba, L
ombl
em, A
lor,
Tim
or, W
etar
, Le
ti an
d B
arba
r Isl
ands
. The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not
know
n.
Bor
neo
(BO
R)
34B
ER
-2; B
RE
-2;
DR
E-6
; FR
E-4
;LE
P-8;
PA
R-1
2
A g
reat
man
y of
the
spec
imen
s ar
e in
dica
ted
as re
pres
entin
g D
ayak
tr
ibes
, som
e ha
ve e
labo
rate
dec
orat
ions
. The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
Java
(JAV
)50
BE
R-1
; B
LU-8
;C
HA
-9; D
RE
-1;
LEP-
24; P
AR
-7
Cra
nia
wer
e co
llect
ed fr
om s
ever
al d
iffer
ent l
ocal
ities
in Ja
va. T
he
exac
t dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Pol
ynes
iaE
aste
r Isl
and
(EA
S)50
BE
R-5
; DR
E-9
; PA
R-3
6M
ost o
f th
e cr
ania
in P
aris
wer
e co
llect
ed b
y Pi
nart
in 1
887
at V
aihu
an
d La
Per
ouse
Bay
, Eas
ter I
slan
d. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
i-m
ens
are
not k
now
n.
Haw
aii
(HA
W)
49B
PB-4
9Sp
ecim
ens
repr
esen
t pre
hist
oric
Haw
aiia
ns fr
om th
e M
okap
u Sa
nd
Dun
e si
te, O
`ahu
Isl
and.
Mar
ques
as(M
RQ
)63
PAR
-49;
LE
P-1;
BLU
-1;
BPB
-12
Cra
nia
are
from
four
isla
nds,
Fatu
Hiv
a, T
ahua
ta, N
uku
Hiv
a an
d H
iva
Oa.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
New
Zea
land
(NZ
)50
BR
E-3
;PA
R-2
1;SA
M-1
; AIM
-13;
G
OT-
1; Z
UR
-5;
DR
E-6
A re
pres
enta
tive
sam
ple
of N
ew Z
eala
nd M
aori
cran
ia fr
om th
e N
orth
and
Sou
th I
slan
ds o
f N
ew Z
eala
nd. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Tong
a-Sa
moa
(TO
G)
12B
ER
-3; A
MS-
1;
DR
E-1
; PA
R-1
;B
PB-4
;AIM
-2
Eig
ht s
peci
men
s ar
e fr
om T
onga
and
four
are
from
Sam
oa. T
wo
of th
e To
ngan
cra
nia
are
from
the
To-A
t-1,
2 s
ites
on T
onga
tapu
(P
ietr
usew
sky,
1969
a,b)
. The
exa
ct d
ates
of
the
rem
aini
ng s
peci
men
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Tahi
ti(T
AH
)44
PAR
-33;
BPB
-11
Cra
nia
are
from
the
isla
nd o
f Ta
hiti,
Soc
iety
Isl
ands
, Fre
nch
Poly
ne-
sia.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
58 59
Mic
rone
sia
Gua
m(G
UA
)46
BPB
-42;
PAR
-4Pr
e-Sp
anis
h C
ham
orro
cra
nia
asso
ciat
ed w
ith la
tte s
truc
ture
s co
llect
-ed
in th
e 19
20’s
by H
ans
Hor
nbos
tel a
long
Tum
on B
each
, Tum
on
Bay
, Gua
m. T
he m
ajor
ity o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s re
pres
ent p
rehi
stor
ic
(pre
-152
1) C
ham
orro
.M
elan
esia
Adm
iralty
Isl
ands
(AD
R)
50D
RE
-20;
GO
T-9;
CH
A-6
;T
UB
-15;
Spec
imen
s fr
om H
erm
it (2
2), K
anie
t (15
) and
Man
us (1
3) I
slan
ds o
f th
e A
dmira
lty I
slan
ds. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kn
own.
Van
uatu
(VA
N)
47BA
S-47
Mos
t of
the
spec
imen
s w
ere
colle
cted
by
Felix
Spe
iser
in 1
912
from
M
alo,
Pen
teco
st a
nd E
spirt
u Sa
nto
Isla
nds
of th
e A
dmira
lty I
slan
ds.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.Fi
ji Is
land
s(F
IJ)
32B
ER
-1; A
MS-
3;
PAR
-8; Q
MB
-1;
DR
E-4
; SA
M-3
; FR
E-3
; C
HA
-1;B
PB-8
Cra
nia
are
from
all
maj
or is
land
s in
clud
ing
the
Lau
Gro
up in
the
Fiji
Isla
nds.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
New
Brit
ain
(NB
R)
50C
HA
-20;
DR
E-
30M
ost o
f th
e cr
ania
in D
resd
en w
ere
colle
cted
by
Pöhl
in 1
887-
1888
fr
om th
e no
rthe
rn e
nd o
f th
e is
land
; the
spe
cim
ens
in G
öttin
gen
wer
e co
llect
ed d
urin
g th
e Sü
dsee
Exp
editi
on in
190
8. T
he e
xact
da
tes
of th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Sepi
k R
.(S
EP)
50D
RE
-33;
GO
T-10
;T
UB
-7
The
spe
cim
ens
in D
resd
en w
ere
colle
cted
by
Otto
Sch
lagi
nhau
fen
in 1
909
from
var
ious
loca
tions
alo
ng th
e Se
pik
Riv
er, P
apua
New
G
uine
a. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn
Aus
tral
ia/T
asm
ania
Mur
ray
R.
(MR
B)
50A
IA-3
9; D
AM
-11
Aus
tral
ian
Abo
rigin
al c
rani
a w
ere
colle
cted
by
G.M
. Bla
ck a
long
the
Mur
ray
Riv
er (C
how
illa
to C
oobo
ol) i
n N
ew S
outh
Wal
es b
etw
een
1929
and
195
0. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Nor
ther
n Te
rri-
tory
(NT
)
50A
IA-4
; AM
S-3;
M
MS-
1; N
MV-
38;
QM
B-1
; SA
M-3
Aus
tral
ian
Abo
rigin
al c
rani
a fr
om P
ort D
arw
in (3
9) a
nd A
rnhe
mla
nd
(36)
in th
e N
orth
ern
Terr
itory
, Aus
tral
ia. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Tasm
ania
(TA
S)26
TH
M-2
2; C
HA
-1;
SAM
-2; N
MV-
1T
he c
rani
a re
pres
ent T
asm
ania
n A
borig
ines
. The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
60 61
1 AIM, Auckland Institute and Museum, Auckland, New Zealand; AIA, Australian Institute of Anatomy, Canberra, Australia; AMS, The Australian Museum, Sydney, Australia; AUK, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand; BAS, Naturhistorisches Museum, Basel, Swit-zerland; BER, Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin, Germany; BLU, Anat-omisches Institut, Universität Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany; BPB, B. P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, U.S.A.; BRE, Über-see Museum, Bre-men, Germany; CHA, Anatomisches Institut der Chairté, Humboldt Universität, Berlin, Germany; CHB, Chiba University School of Medi-cine, Chiba, Japan; DAM, Dept. of Anatomy, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; DRE, Museum für Völkerkunde, Dresden, Ger-many; DUN, Dept. of Anatomy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand; FRE, Institut für Humangenetik und Anthropologie, Uni-versität Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany ; GOT, Institut für Anthropologie, Universität Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany; HCM, Faculty of Medicine, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam; KYO, Physical An-thropology Laboratory, Faculty of Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan; KYU, Dept. of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Kyushu Univer-sity, Fukuoka, Japan; LEP, Anatomisches Institut, Karl Marx Univer-sität, Leipzig, Germany; MMS, Macleay Museum, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; NMV, National Museum of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia; NSM, National Science Museum, Tokyo; PAR, Musée de l’Homme, Paris, France; QMB, Queensland Museum, Brisbane, Aus-tralia; SAM, South Australian Museum, Adelaide, Australia; SAP, Dept. of Anatomy, Sapporo Medical College, Sapporo, Japan; SEN, Dept. of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan; SHA, Institute of Anthropology, College of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China; SIM, National Museum of Natural History, Smith-sonian Institution, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.; SIR, Dept. of Anatomy, Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand; THM, Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery, Hobart, Australia; TKM, Medical Museum, University Mu-seum, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan; TKO, University Museum, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan; TPE, Academia Sinica, Nankang, Taipei, Taiwan; TUB, Institut für Anthropologie u. Humangenetik, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany; ZUR, Anthropologisches Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Table 2. A ranking of 19 cranial measurements for 33 male groups according to F-values received in the final step
of discriminant function analysis
Step No. Measurement1 F-Value d.f.B/d.f.w2 P3
1 Maximum cranial breadth (M-8)
41.125 17/757 *
2 Alveolar length (M-60) 31.692 2/89 *3 Basion-nasion length (M-5) 26.204 17/756 *4 Nasion-prosthion (MH-
NPH)22.351 16/711 *
5 Maximum cranial length (M-1)
11.952 22/977 *
6 Nasion-bregma chord (M-29)
11.990 8/355 *
7 Alveolar Breadth (M-61) 11.523 20/887 *8 Malar length, inferior (H-
IML)9.941 16/709 *
9 Biauricular breadth (M-11b)
9.708 18/797 *
10 Cheek height (H-WMH) 8.915 4/177 *11 Nasio-frontal subtense
(H-NAS)8.411 9/398 *
12 Nasal Breadth (M-54) 7.733 16/707 *13 Maximum frontal breadth
(M-10)5.243 19/839 *
14 Bregma-lambda chord (M-30)
4.848 8/353 *
15 Interorbital breadth I (PD) 4.715 21/926 *16 Bifrontal breadth (M-43) 4.574 16/705 *17 Bistephanic breadth (H-
STB)4.262 22/969 *
18 Biasterionic breadth (M-12) 2.677 1/44 *19 Minimum frontal breadth
(M-9)1.928 22/967 *
1 M= Martin and Saller (1957); H = Howells (1973); PD= (Pietrusewsky and Douglas, 2002) 2 d.f.B/d.f.w = degrees of freedom between/degrees of freedom within.3 p<.01
62 63
Table 3. Eigenvalues, percentage of total dispersion, cumulative percentage of dispersion and level of significance of the first 10 canonical variates using 19 measurements and 33 male groups
CanonicalVariate
Eigenvalues % Dispersion
Cumulative%
Dispersion
d.f.1 p2
1 2.76364 43.4 43.4 50 *2 1.00791 15.8 59.2 48 *3 0.49255 7.7 66.9 46 *4 0.44851 7.1 74.0 44 *5 0.36433 5.7 79.7 42 *6 0.26831 4.2 83.9 40 *7 0.24221 3.8 87.7 38 *8 0.17252 2.8 90.5 36 *9 0.11844 1.8 92.3 34 *10 0.10546 1.7 94.0 32 *
1d.f. = degrees of freedom = (p + q - 2) + (p + q - 4)...2p<.01 when eigenvalues are tested for significance according to Bartlett’s criterion [N - 1/2(p + q)] loge (1 + λ), where N = total number of crania, p = number of variables, q = number of groups, λ = eigenvalue, which are distributed approximately as chi-square (Rao, 1952:323).
Table 4. Canonical coefficients for 19 cranial measurementsrecorded in 33 male groups for the first three canonical variates
Variable1 Canonical Variate 1
Coefficient
Canonical Variate 2
Coefficient
Canonical Variate 3
Coefficient
Maximum cranial length (M-1)
-0.00776 -0.04812 -0.12371
Basion-nasion length (M-5) 0.07799 -0.17555 0.02708Maximum cranial breadth (M-8)
0.03710 0.07777 -0.03078
Maximum frontal breadth (M-10)
-0.00508 0.06725 -0.05079
Bistephanic breadth (H-STB)
0.04462 -0.04874 0.01008
Biauricular breadth (M-11b) 0.05175 -0.06158 0.02447Biasterionic breadth (M-12) -0.01687 0.00630 -0.03929Nasion-prosthion (MH-NPH)
0.08906 0.04390 0.05290
Nasal breadth (M-54) -0.03884 0.12534 0.11440Alveolar length (M-60) -0.20417 -0.05022 0.01597Alveolar breadth (M-61) -0.03872 0.10547 0.09927Bifrontal breadth (M-43) -0.01422 -0.03581 -0.09709Interorbital breadth I (PD) -0.01879 0.14067 0.06111Malar length, inferior (H-IML)
-0.07996 0.06170 0.10392
Cheek height (H-WMH) 0.14043 -0.01649 0.10143Nasion-bregma chord (M-29)
-0.01692 -0.05736 0.14051
Bregma-lambda chord (M-30)
-0.00412 0.02789 0.01438
Nasio-frontal subtense (H-NAS)
-0.09800 0.05130 0.07774
1 M= Martin and Saller (1957); H = Howells (1973); PD= (Pietrusewsky and Douglas, 2002).
64 65
Figure 1. Locations of the comparative cranial series used inthe present analyses
Figure 2. Plot of 33 group means on the first two canonical variates using 19 cranial measurements (see Table 1 for an
explanation of the group abbreviations)
66 67
Figure 3. Diagram of relationship (dendrogram) based on a cluster analysis (UPGMA) of Mahalanobis’ generalized
distances using 19 cranial measurements recorded in 33 male groups
Chapter 3
Degree of inbreeding and fluctuating asymmetry in a subdivided caste of Andhra Pradesh, India
B. Mohan Reddy1#, Alexa Pfeffer2, Shilpi Dasgupta1, P.V.S. Sirisha1 and MH Crawford2
1Molecular Anthropology Group, Biological Anthropology Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Hyderabad
2 Laboratory for Biological Anthropology, Department of Anthropology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas
#Corresponding author
Abstract
We examined fluctuating asymmetry of the a-b ridge count in relation to the degree of inbreeding in the members of endogamous subcastes of Gollas in Andhra Pradesh, India. The a-b ridge counts were scored on a sample of 319 adult male from which dermal prints were collect-ed. These samples were collected from 30 villages spread over 9 taluks of Chittoor district in Andhra Pradesh and belong to 7 endogamous sub-castes of a traditionally nomadic shepherd caste called Golla. The results do not suggest significant association between degree of in-breeding and fluctuating asymmetry in any of the sub-castes or in a pooled sample of Gollas. The long term inbreeding of the southern Indian populations, which is not usually considered, is interpreted as possible confounding factor that might have reduced the differences in fluctuating asymmetry between inbred and non-inbred samples.
Key words: Consanguinity, inbreeding coefficient, fluctuating asym-metry of a-b ridge count, phenotypic value, heterozygosity.
Introduction
Fluctuating asymmetry (FA) is the absolute difference between the right and left measurements in paired structures (Markow and Martin,
footnotes for Table 3
1d.f. = degrees of freedom = (p + q - 2) + (p + q - 4)... 2p<.01 when eigenvalues are tested for significance according to Bartlett's criterion [N - 1/2(p + q)] loge (1 + λ), where N = total number of crania, p = number of variables, q = number of groups, λ = eigenvalue, which are distributed approximately as chi-square (Rao, 1952:323).
Res
earc
h in
Phy
sica
l Ant
hrop
olog
y: E
ssay
s in
Hon
or o
f Pro
fess
or L
. S. P
enro
seEdited by
Sudip Datta Banik
Research in Physical Anthropology:Essays in Honor of
Professor L. S. Penrose
About the Book
This scientific volume is edited by Dr. Sudip Datta Banik to pay homage to Professor Lionel Sharples Penrose (11 June 1898 – 12 May 1972). Professor Penrose was a celebrated British psychiatrist, medical geneticist, andmathematician. He is famous for his pioneering work on genetics of mental retardation.
This edited volume has eighteen chapters contributed by eminent scientists in the areas of human genetics, dermatoglyphics and quantitative traits, population studies, health, nutrition and epidemiology and primatology. This book has four sections in its contents. The first section includes re-search papers on methodological issues related to heredity, inbreeding and asymmetry of dermatoglyphics in human populations, application ofPearson’s Coefficient of Racial Likeness (C.R.L.) and Penrose’s Size and Shape statistics to cranial variations of Polynesian origins. The reportsrepresent Indian, Polynesian and Chinese populations.
The second section is focused on dermatoglyphic variations in human populations. Authors contributed research articles on dermatoglyphicsrepresenting Turkmenian population, Hani nationality of China, and popu-lations from Belarus Republic, Cuba, sub-Saharan Africa and Switzerland. Application of dermatoglyphics in diagnosis of diabetes Type 1 has been dis-cussed by a author with reference to a sample from central province of Iran.
In the third section, papers are in the perspectives of human growth epide-miology, health and nutrition. The first article reports on height of children from migrant families from rural areas to Mexico City. The authors have compared the results of their present study with two earlier studies. Two scientists of Canada analyzed the British War Diaries of early 20th century and presented a report on pandemic influenza and sickness among theBritish Expeditionary Forces (BEF) stationed in France and their mortality statistics. In the other chapters, health and nutritional status, of some In-dian tribal populations are discussed.
The fourth section has two papers, contributed by a group of scientists of Central Washington University in USA. In human societies, especially in western cultures, isolation is a common problem for the aged people. How-ever, it also true for the non-human primates. The authors have beautifully portrayed in chapter 17, the changing group behavior patterns with age in the Tibetan macaques (Macaca thibetana) living in Huangshan, Anhui Province, China. In the other chapter, author has reported on duet signing patterns of Black Gibbons (Nomascus concolor jingdongensis) in forests of Xiaobahe in Central Yunnan Province.
Research in Physical Anthropology: Essays in Honor of Profesor L. S. Penrose© 2010 Sudip Datta Banik© 2010 unas letras industria editorial
Published byunas letras industria editorialCalle 64 No. 560 x 71 y 73Centro Histórico C.P. 97000, Mérida, Yucatánwww.unasletras.com
First edition: September, 2010
Disclaimer
The views expressed by the authors in the papers published in this present edited volume are their own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the editor. The editors is in no way responsible for any liability arising out of the contents or any presentation given in the text / information / tables / figures or any part of the papers / articles. Neither the editor nor the publisher will remain responsible for any dispute, controversy and / or legal complications, if they arise in connection with any questioned authenticity, duplication, replication, plagiarism or of its kind, if any etc. in part or as a whole of any paper / article published in this present edited volume.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, xerography, or any information storage and retreieval system, whitout permission in writing from the editor.
Printed in México
Research in Physical Anthropology: Essays in Honor of
Professor L. S. Penrose
Edited bySudip Datta Banik
About the editor
Dr. Sudip Datta BanikM.Sc., Ph.D. FICN (Canada)
Dr. Datta Banik is presently attached as a visiting researcher and faculty (Investigador) in the Departament of Human Ecology at Cinvestav del IPN – Mérida, Yucatán, México.In India he is holding a senior faculty position in the post-graduate department of Anthropology at Vidyasagar Uni-versity in West Bengal, India. He has published thirty-four research articles in journals of international repute and has contributed six chapters in edited volumes. He has edited four scientific volumes. He also act as a peer reviewer for some Indian and international journals.
Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados (Cinvestav)del Instituto Politécnico Nacional (IPN) Mérida
Departamento de Ecología Humana
Antigua carretera a Progreso km. 6 C.P. 97310 Mérida, Yucatán, México
Telephone+52999 942-94-09 (Office)
Fax+52999 981-46-70 (Office)
Email [email protected] [email protected]
[email protected] [email protected]
Acknowledgement
I express my heartfelt gratitude to the distinguished authors of the chapters in this volume.
I avail this opportunity to express my immense gratefulness to my teacher, Dr. D. P. Mukherjee, former Professor of Anthropology, Uni-versity of Calcutta. His valuable suggestions helped me to complete the work successfully. It is also my proud privilege to mention that Professor D.P. Mukherjee did his Ph.D. under Professor L.S. Penrose at Galton Laboratory in London in 1967. So I feel myself fortunate to pay a tribute to Professor Penrose through this work.
We are also thankful to the unas letras industria editorial and especially to Eugenia Montalván Colón for support and co-operation towards the publication of the volume.
Mérida, Yucatán, México 16th September, 2010Sudip Datta Banik
Contents
Section IHeritability Studies and Methods for Analyzing
Quantitative and Dermatoglyphic Traits
Chapter 1 L. S. Penrose and the study of raceMolly K. Zuckerman & George J. Armelagos
Chapter 2 A multivariate analysis of cranial measurements: Fijian and Polynesian relationshipsMichael Pietrusewsky
Chapter 3Degree of inbreeding and fluctuating asymmetry in a subdivided caste of Andhra Pradesh, IndiaB. Mohan Reddy, Alexa Pfeffer, Shilpi Dasgupta, P.V.S. Sirisha, MH Crawford
Chapter 4 Regression formula for palm atd angles and agesZhang Haiguo
Chapter 5Let us get together-the rejoinder of dermatoglyphics, forensic sciences and hand analysis - palmistryCampbell, Edward ED. J.D.
Chapter 6 Qualitative and quantitative finger and palmar dermatoglyphics: Sexual dimorphism in the Turkmenian populationB. Karmakar & E. Kobyliansky
From the editor’s desk
Physical anthropologists study biological variation of human popu-lations in multidisciplinary approach. Human evolution, behavior,heredity, and primate studies are some of the major branches of physi-cal anthropology. Knowledge of society and cultural traditions, migra-tion and environmental issues etc. also help us to understand a human population in holistic fashion. Studies of human ‘race’ or ethnic groups and understanding of human variations were the fundamental investi-gations that were initiated by the physical anthropologists in 18th cen-tury. Johann Friedrich Blumenbach 1752–1840), by Paul Broca (1824–1880), Franz Boas (1858–1942), and Ales Hrdlicka (1869–1943) are some of the great physical anthropologists. There are many renowned scientists who directly or indirectly contributed their work in different areas of physical anthropology and human biology in last centuries.
Professor Lionel Sharples Penrose was a medical geneticist andpsychiatrist. His “The Biology of Mental Defect”, published bySidgwick and Jackson Ltd., London, U.K. in 1949 is a classical hand-book to every researcher. He was elected as the Fellow of the Royal Society in 1953 and the Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of London in 1962. Professor Penrose was the Galton Chair Professor of Eugenics and the Director of the Galton Laboratory at University College of London during 1945 to 1965. In 1963, he received the pres-tigious international award of the Joseph P. Kennedy (Jr.) Foundation for his pioneering research on mental retardation and he established the famous Kennedy-Galton Centre for Mental Deficiency Research and Diagnosis. He was the Emeritus Professor of Human Genetics in the University of London, Kennedy-Galton Centre, Harperbury Hos-pital, St.Albans. Laxova (1998) beautifully portrayed a biography of Professor Penrose.
These are only a few words to pay my homage to Professor L. S.Penrose. I am fortunate that the eminent scientists have given me the opportunity to enrich myself through their esteemed contributions in this volume.
Sudip Datta Banik
Reference: Laxova Renata (1998) Lionel Sharples Penrose, 1898–1972: A Personal Memoir in Celebration of the Centenary of His Birth. Genetics 150: 1333–1340
11
37
67
89
97
115
Section II Dermatoglyphic Variation in Human Populations
Chapter 7Application of Dermatoglyphic Traits for Diagnosis of Diabetic Type 1 PatientsHossein Rezaei Nezhad & Nasser Mahdavi Shahri
Chapter 8Hani nationality dermatoglyphics in ChinaZhang Haiguo
Chapter 9Dermatoglyphics in the complex researches of Belarus Republic populationL.I. Tegako
Chapter 10Dermatoglyphic traits of sub-Saharan African subjectsP.S. Igbigbi
Chapter 11Canary Islands origin of the Hypothenar radial arch in Cuban familiesMayra Hernández Iglesias & Liane Borbolla Vacher
Chapter 12Dermatoglyphics in the population of Cugy (Switzerland)Floris Giovanni
Chapter 13Height growth of children from popular neighbourhoods of Mexico CityJavier Rosique Gracia & Julieta Aréchiga Viramontes
Section IIIEpidemiology, Healt and Nutrition
Chapter 14Influenza among British expeditionary forces in France, 1916-1918D. Ann Herring & Janet Padiak
Chapter 15Nutritional status influencing body structure and functions among Saharia - a primitive tribe of Central IndiaSatwanti Kapoor & A.K. Kapoor
Chapter 16 Nutritional Status and Morbidity Pattern among Jenu Kuruba Children of Mysore District, KarnatakaS.C. Jai Prabhakar & M.R. Gangadhar
Section IV Studies of Non-Human Primate
Chapter 17A Preliminary Analysis of Aging and Potential SocialPartners in Tibetan Macaques (Macaca thibetana)Lori K. Sheeran, Megan D. Matheson, Jinhua Li,R. Steven Wagner
Chapter 18Lack of Seasonal Influence on Duet Duration in Black Gibbons (Nomascus concolor jingdongensis)Lori K. Sheerant
147
159
177
193
247
255
261
287
303
325
349
359
36 37
Stone D (2001) Race in British Eugenics. European History Quarterly 31(3):397-425.
Thomson A (1903) A Consideration of Some of the More Important Factors Concerned in the Production of Man’s Cranial Form.Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 33:135-166.
Trapper M (1995) Interrogating bodies: Medico-racial knowledge, politics and the study of a disease. Comparative Study of Society and History I:76-93.
Trapper M (1998) In The Blood: Sickle Cell Anemia and the Politicsof Race. Philadelphia: University of Pennslvania Press.
Tredgold AF (1929) Mental deficiency (amentia). New York: W. Wood and company.
UNESCO (1950) The Race Question: UNESCO.— (1952) The race concept; results of an inquiry. Paris: UNESCO.
Watt DC (1998) L. S. Penrose FRS (1898-1972). Psychiatrist and professor of human genetics. British Journal of Psychiatry173:458-61.
Wolstenholme GEW, Porter R, eds. (1967) Mongolism, Ciba Founda-tion Study Group Number 25. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.
Chapter 2
A multivariate analysis of cranial measurements: Fijian and Polynesian relationships
Michael PietrusewskyDepartment of Anthropology
University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.
Abstract
There is a long history of studies in physical/biological anthropology that have focused on Polynesian origins using cranial variation. This chapter begins with a brief history of multivariate statistical proce-dures including Pearson’s Coefficient of Racial Likeness (C.R.L.) and Penrose’s Size and Shape statistics, precursors to more advanced mul-tivariate procedures such as Mahalanobis’ D2. A few examples of the application of these earlier statistical procedures to craniometric data for understanding the population history of the Pacific are given. The main focus of this chapter is the application of applying stepwise dis-criminant function analysis and Mahalanobis’ D2 to 19 cranial measure-ments recorded in male crania from site VL 16/1 at Sigatoka, Fiji (1820 ± 90 BP) and 32 additional near modern cranial series from the Pacific and Asia for understanding the population history of this region. The results of this analysis indicate that Sigatoka crania are closest to other Melanesian (e.g., Fiji, New Caledonia, Loyalty Islands, and Vanuatu) cranial series suggesting extensive contact between Fiji and geographi-cal island Melanesia had already occurred by the third century A.D.
Keywords: Penrose size and shape, CRL, Mahalanobis’ generalized distance, discriminant function analysis, Sigatoka, Fiji.
Introduction
W.W. Howells (1997) remarked that studies in physical anthropology, which up until the mid-nineteenth century had been primarily (often intricate) exercises in typological racial classification, were transformed
38 39
by two important changes, namely the use of genetic traits and ad-vances in statistical analysis. The giant breakthrough in statistics was the development of a class of statistical methods known as multivari-ate analysis; a family of related mathematical procedures that, among other things, allowed the simultaneous analysis of multiple variables (i.e., measurements) and the removal of intercorrelation among the variables. The use of these advanced statistical methods was facilitated by the accessibility and availability of high-speed computers. Although multivariate procedures had been formulated earlier, the extensive hand calculations made computation of this category of statistical proce-dures formidable without the use of a computer.
Much of the transformation in statistics in anthropology can be traced to the work of Karl Pearson at the Biometric Laboratory, Univer-sity College, London. An early precursor of multivariate statistics was Pearson’s Coefficient of Racial Likeness--CRL (Pearson, 1926, 1928), which Pearson and his followers began to apply to studies of skulls for investigating population history. Another early attempt at devising an easier way to calculate a measure of biological distance were the Size and Shape statistics introduced by Penrose (1954). However, as was soon demonstrated, both the CRL and Penrose’s Size and Shape sta-tistics had a number of inadequacies when used as measures of group divergence. Most notably, neither statistic sufficiently allowed for the intercorrelation of the variables (measurements), number of measure-ments used, differences in sample size, or a way to test for significance. Despite these obstacles and even Pearson’s cautionary note that CRL was not a measure of morphometric distance (Pearson, 1926:105), the relative ease of calculating these statistics, especially Penrose’s size and shape, attracted many earlier (e.g., von Bonin, 1931, 1936; Wagner, 1937) as well as later devotees, including some recent work in Pacific craniometry (e.g., Katayama, 1987, 1994; Houghton, 1989, 2008).
Interpretations of population history in the Pacific based on CRL and similar statistics resulted in often confusing and spurious results. For example, Wagner (1937) made use of the CRL in analyzing crani-ometric data for a number of Pacific island series available to him at that time. In one such analysis, Wagner remarked,
“It appears, also, that the Moriori are closer to the Marquesans and Society Islanders than to their immediate neighbours, the Maori…” (Wagner, 1937:129); and
“In general, the coefficients… show an interesting agreement with the geographical relations, but they also lead to surprises which demand special attention.” (Wagner, 1937:129).
The statistical shortcomings of CRL were soon overcome with the introduction of Mahalanobis’ D2, or generalized distance (Mahalanobis, 1930, 1936; Mahalanobis et al; 1949). This statistic, which corrected for intercorrelation of variables and allowed the handling of large number of variables simultaneously as well as testing of significance, remains the gold standard for measuring biological distance based on metrical and phenotypic data.
Pietrusewsky’s doctoral dissertation research (Pietrusewsky, 1969a, 1969b) used both Penrose’s Size and Shape statistics and Mahalanobis’ D2 for understanding biological relationships of Polynesian cranial se-ries, but subsequent work abandoned the use of the Size and Shape sta-tistics. Results obtained using Mahalanobis’ D2 found that the Moriori (Chatham Islanders) were more closely related to the New Zealand Maori and Marquesans in contrast to results reported by Wagner using CRL (Pietrusewsky, 1970). Likewise, the D2 results indicated close simi-larity between Hawaiians and New Zealand Maori, which contradicted the results found using CRL (Pietrusewsky, 1970). It should be noted, however, that Wagner, who was one of the first to apply the CRL to craniometric data from the Pacific, cautioned readers in accepting the results based on this statistic (Wagner, 1937:143).
Despite these and more recent warnings, studies (some very recent) that use Penrose’s Size and Shape statistics for understanding biological relationships of Pacific Islanders continue to appear in the literature. Examples of the application of Penrose’s Size and Shape statistics in-clude Houghton’s analysis of skeletal and dental remains from Watom Island (Houghton, 1989) and Tuamako Islands, a Polynesian outlier in the Solomon Islands (Houghton, 2008) and Katayama’s work involving Cook Island and other Polynesian series (Katayama, 1987, 1994). For
40 41
a more detailed discussion of the failings of these earlier multivariate statistical procedures, including criticism of work in the Pacific region that used these crude measures of divergence, readers are directed to Buranarugsa and Leach (1993).
In this paper multivariate statistical procedures, stepwise discrimi-nant function analysis and Mahalanobis’ generalized distance, are ap-plied to measurements recorded in six of the most complete male cra-nia from the prehistoric site of Sigatoka, located in Fiji, for assessing the biological relationships of prehistoric Fijians and neighboring Pa-cific and Asian groups.
Sigatoka Skeletal Series
Archaeological excavations in the 1970s found extensive evidence of occupation surfaces including some human skeletal remains at the Si-gatoka sand dunes site (Site VL 16/1) located at the mouth of the Sigatoka River on the southwestern coast of Viti Levu, Republic of Fiji (Birks, 1973). In 1987 and 1988 the remains of approximately 55 individuals, which have been dated to 1820 ± 90 BP, were excavated by Simon Best at the VL 16/1 site (Best, 1987, 1989), making this one of the largest samples of archaeological human skeletal remains from Fiji. The Sigatoka skeletons post-date the earliest inhabitants of Fiji who were associated with the Lapita cultural tradition (2900 - 2950 BP) (Kirch, 1997). Fiji, which lies at the boundary of eastern Melanesia and western Polynesia, is further believed to have been initially settled by Austronesian speaking people who were the direct antecedents of the present day Polynesians. The time when the burial mound at Sigatoka was being used coincides with a critical period in Fiji’s prehistory, a time when major intrusions of people from the west (Melanesians) are believed to have been taking place (Best, 1989).
The excavations reveal the presence of a structured cemetery in-cluding 20 cairns of rock and coral and several multiple interments. The extreme uniformity in burial pattern, including alignment in an east-west direction with the heads to the west and legs flexed or semi-flexed, and differential elevation of the burials suggest use of the cem-etery at Sigatoka by a highly stratified society (Best 1989:52-58). The
apparent hierarchical ranking of the burials at this site further indicates the possibility that many of the individuals buried in the Sigatoka dunes were related during life (Best, 1989:53-54). In addition, the presence of multiple burials, containing two or three individuals laid side by side suggests the possibility of ritualized killing of wives as was observed and documented historically in Fiji (Best, 1989: 53-55).
Comparative Cranial Series
In addition to the crania from Sigatoka, this study includes comparative data recorded in 32 cranial series from Polynesia, Melanesia, Micro-nesia, Australia, islands and mainland Southeast Asia, East Asia and Mongolia. The approximate place of origin of these series, where the specimens were examined and other information are given in Table 1 and Figure 1. Sample size ranges from 12 to 62. To insure some even-ness of sample size, the maximum number of specimens for most of these groups has been limited to approximately 50 individuals. All data were recorded by the author using complete or nearly complete adult male specimens. The methods for determining age at death and sex follow those described in Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994), Pietrusewsky and Douglas (2002), and White (2000).
Cranial Measurements
Nineteen measurements, which are similar to those of Martin and Saller (1957) and Howells (1973, 1989), are used in the present study (Table 2). This number represents the largest set of measurements for which reliable data could be recorded in the Sigatoka specimens and the comparative series. Missing measurements, which were minimal, were replaced with the regressed values obtained through stepwise re-gression analysis using the computer program, PAM, of the BMDP-7M computer programs (Dixon and Brown, 1979).
Multivariate Statistical Procedures
Two multivariate statistical procedures, stepwise discriminant function analysis and Mahalanobis’ generalized distance statistic, or D2 (Ma-halanobis, 1936), were applied to a total of 19 standard cranial mea-
42 43
surements recorded in male crania in this study. A more detailed discus-sion of these methods is provided by Pietrusewsky (2008b).
Stepwise Discriminant Function (Canonical) Analysis
The major purpose of discriminant function, or canonical, analysis is to maximize differences between groups (to maximize the ratio of between-group variance to total variance) by producing a linear array of weighted variables, referred to as discriminant functions or canoni-cal variates, from the original measurements (Tatsuoka, 1971). Typi-cally, the first few canonical variates account for most of the variation among the groups. In this analysis, the original measurements were selected in a stepwise manner such that, at each step, the measurement that adds most to the separation of the groups was the one entered into the discriminant function in advance of the others (Dixon and Brown, 1979:711). This procedure allows identification of those variables that are most responsible for the observed differentiation between individ-uals of the various groups. Interpretations of discriminant functions and the patterns of group separation are based on an inspection of standardized canonical coefficient values or discriminant coefficients.
At the end of the stepping process, each individual specimen is clas-sified into one of the original groups based on the discriminant scores it receives through the calculation of posterior (regular classification) and/or typicality (jackknifed classification) probabilities (Van Vark and Schaafsma, 1992:244-255). Jackknifed classification represents a com-mon cross-validation procedure in multiple discriminant analysis, where cases are classified without using misclassified individuals in computing the classification function. The results of ‘correct’ and ‘incorrect’ clas-sifications provide a general guide for assessing the homogeneity or heterogeneity of the original series. Only the jackknifed classification results are discussed in presenting the results of this analysis. Another useful feature of stepwise discriminant function analysis is that it al-lows group means to be plotted on the first few canonical variates, thus allowing a visualization of intergroup relationships. The computer program BMDP-7M (Dixon and Brown, 1979) was used to perform the stepwise discriminant function analysis, while two-dimensional and three-dimensional plots were made using the SYGRAPH module of
SYSTAT (Wilkinson, 1992).
Mahalanobis’ Generalized Distance – D2
Mahalanobis’ D2, or the sum of squared differences, provides a single quantitative measure of dissimilarity (distance) between groups using multiple variables while removing the correlation between the variables (Mahalanobis, 1936). The significance of these distances was deter-mined using the method of Rao (1952:245), a procedure recommend-ed by Buranarugsa and Leach (1993:17).
The average linkage within group clustering algorithm, or Un-weighted Pair Group Method Algorithm (UPGMA) (Sneath and Sokal, 1973), was the clustering procedure used to construct the diagrams of relationship, or dendrograms, using Mahalanobis’ distances. The UP-GMA algorithm combines clusters so that the average distance among all cases in the resulting cluster is as small as possible and the distance between two clusters is taken to be the average among all possible pairs of cases in the cluster. The NTSYS-pc computer software program was used to construct the dendrograms (Rohlf, 1993).
Results
The results of applying stepwise discriminant function analysis and Mahalanobis’ generalized distance to 19 cranial measurements record-ed in 1458 male crania are presented in this section.
Stepwise Discriminant Analysis
A summary of the measurements (Table 2), ranked according to the F-values [tests of equality of group means using classical one-way analysis of variance] received in the final step of discriminant function analysis provides an indication of the discriminatory power of the original vari-ables. All values are significant at the 1% level. The variables that con-tribute most to this analysis include maximum cranial breadth, alveolar length, basion-nasion length, nasion-prosthion height, and maximum cranial length.
44 45
Eigenvalues, which represent the amount of variance accounted for by each function or variate, expressed as the percentage of total disper-sion, and level of significance (Rao, 1952:323) for the first ten canonical variates is presented in Table 3. The eigenvalues provide an indication of the proportion of dispersion accounted for by each canonical vari-ate. In this analysis, the first three canonical variates account for 67% of the total variation. The first ten eigenvalues are significant at the 1% level, indicating significant heterogeneity for these canonical variates.
Canonical coefficients, those values by which an individual’s mea-surements may be multiplied to obtain its score, for 19 measurements, for the first three canonical variates are presented next (Table 4). Group separation on the first canonical variate is primarily the result of vari-ation in the length of the hard palate (alveolar length), facial height (cheek height), angulation of the medial margins of the orbits (nasio-frontal subtense), facial height (nasion-prosthion height) and the length of the cranial base (basion-nasion). The correlations are generally weak and two of the five most important discriminators are negatively cor-related. This function can be described as a palate length, and facial height discriminator. The second canonical variate is responsible for group separation primarily on the basis of differences in the length of the cranial base, interorbital breadth, breadth of the nasal aperture, and palate breadth. This variate is thus a cranial base length and mid-facial breadth discriminator. Group separation on the third variate is primar-ily due to differences in frontal chord length, maximum cranial length, nasal breadth and malar size.
A plot of the group means on the first two canonical variates, which account for approximately 59% of the total variation, is presented in Figure 2. The cranial series generally group into one of four major constellations. Most of the Melanesian and Australian cranial series, including the Sigatoka series, occupy one of these major groupings. Island and mainland Southeast Asian series form a second constella-tion while the East Asian series form a third. Finally, the Polynesian and Guam cranial series form a loose affiliation. Mongolia and Jomon occupy outlier positions in this representation.
Given the restriction of space, the complete results of group clas-sification obtained in this discriminant function analysis are not pre-sented. Overall, the total percentage of cases correctly classified in the jackknifed classification results is extremely low, 39%. The correct clas-sification results obtained for Sigatoka are among the poorest (17%) in this analysis. Only one of Sigatoka specimens is (correctly) re-assigned to this group. Two of the Sigatoka specimens are re-classified to Fiji and one each is classified as Vanuatu, Tahiti, and Ainu. A single speci-men each is re-classified as Sigatoka for 5 Polynesian and 4 Melanesian series.
Mahalanobis’ D2
The diagram of relationship that results when the Unweighted Pair Group Method (UPGMA) of cluster analysis is applied to Mahalano-bis’ generalized distance is presented in Figure 3. In this diagram, Siga-toka forms a close connection with Vanuatu and then Fiji, a grouping which is part of a larger constellation composed of cranial series from Melanesia and Australia. With the exception of the Admiralty Islands series, the second major grouping evident in this diagram contains the cranial series from East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Polynesia. The Ainu and Jomon form a close association, which together with Mongolia are outliers of this Asian-Polynesian division.
Although the distances (not presented here) obtained for the Siga-toka series are relatively large, the groups closest to Sigatoka include the cranial series from Fiji, Admiralty Islands, Ryukyu Islands, New Zealand (Maori), and Tahiti.
Discussion and conclusions
Dumont d’Urville (1832) was one of the first to observe that Fijians possess phenotypic and cultural characteristics similar to Melanesians to the west, similarities they share as a result of long term contact with the inhabitants of central Melanesia. For that reason Dumont d’Urville categorized Fijians as Melanesian rather than Polynesian despite the geographic proximity to western Polynesia and the fact that the first inhabitants of the Fiji Islands were associated with the Lapita cultural
46 47
complex, the presumed antecedents of Polynesians and other remote Oceanic peoples. Although archaeologists who have worked in Fiji have voiced some opposition ( See a recent review of these by Burley, 2005) Best’s analysis of decorative elements found in ceramic assem-blages associated with the Sigatoka sand dune burials strongly suggests contact with the west (Best, 1989).
As demonstrated in previous analyses of craniometric data (e.g., Pietrusewsky, 1990, 1994, 2005, 2006a, 2006b, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2010) the new multivariate analyses presented in this chapter, which include crania from the Sigatoka sand dunes in Fiji, demonstrate the presence of two major divisions representing the indigenous inhabit-ants of Oceania. The Sigatoka sample aligns with cranial series from geographical Melanesia and Australia, which together represent one of these major divisions. The cranial series from Guam and Polynesia oc-cupy a separate branch of a second larger Asian-Polynesian division. The initial inhabitants of Fiji were associated with the Lapita cultural horizon, the presumed ancestors of modern day inhabitants of Polyne-sia and Remote Oceania (Green, 1997; Kirch, 1997). However, in this study the Sigatoka (which post-date Lapita deposits) and near modern Fijian cranial series show little resemblance to the indigenous inhabit-ants of Polynesia and Micronesia, a finding that differs substantially from that reached by Visser in his study of the Sigatoka skeletal re-mains (Visser, 1994:ii). These results, supporting both the more recent work of Best and early observations of Dumont d’Urville, indicate that there had been extensive contact between later prehistoric inhabit-ants of Fiji and the inhabitants of geographical Melanesia by the third century A.D.
Acknowledgment
The skeletal remains from Sigatoka, Fiji were examined by the author and Michele Toomay Douglas in the Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand in 1992. My thanks to Edward Visser and Philip Houghton and the De-partment of Anatomy and Structural Biology, University of Otago, who facilitated this study. Permission to examine cranial series presented in this study are acknowledged elsewhere (e.g., Pietrusewsky 1990, 1992,
1995; Pietrusewsky et al., 1992). Financial support for this research was provided by the Richard Loundsbery Foundation (New York) and the University of Hawaii (Honolulu).
References
Best SB (1987) A preliminary report on the Sigatoka burials.Domodomo 3: 2-15
Best SB (1989) The Sigatoka dune burials. Unpublished report on file with the Fiji Museum, Suva
Birks L (1973) Archaeological excavations at Sigatoka dune site, Fiji Bulletin No 1. Fiji Museum, Suva
Buikstra JE, Ubelaker DH eds. (1994) Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Arkansas Archaeological Survey Research Series No 44. Arkansas Archaeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas
Buranarugsa M, Leach DP (1993) Coordinate geometry of Morioricrania and comparisons with Maori. Man and Culture inOceania 9:1-43
Dixon WJ, Brown MB, eds. (1979) Biomedical computer programsP-series. University of California Press, Berkley
Dumont d’Urville MJ (1832) Notice sur les îles du Grand Océanet ur l’origine des peuples qui les habitent. Société de GéographieBulletin 17: 1–21
Green RC (1997) Linguistic, biological and cultural origins of theinitial inhabitants of Remote Oceania. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 17 (1995):5-27
Houghton P (1989) Watom: the people. Records of the AustralianMuseum 41: 223-233
48 49
Houghton P (2008) The people of Namu. In Leach F, Davidson J, Archaeology on Taumako, A Polynesian outlier in the easternSolomon Islands. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology SpecialPublication, Dunedin, New Zealand, 325-352
Howells WW (1973) Cranial variation in man. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol 67, Cambridge,Massachusetts
Howells WW (1989) Skull shapes and the map. Craniometric analyses in the dispersion of modern Homo. Papers of the PeabodyMuseum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol 79, Cambridge,Massachusetts
Howells WW (1997) Oceania. In Spencer F ed. History of physical anthropology. Garland Publishing. Inc., New York, 762-775
Katayama K (1987) Physical anthropology in Polynesia: Japanesecontribution. Man and Culture in Oceania 3 Special Issue: 1-18
Katayama K (1994) Biological affinities between southern CookIslanders and New Zealand Maori: Implications for the settlement of New Zealand. In Sutton DG ed. The origins of the first NewZealanders. Auckland University Press, Auckland, 230-242
Kirch PV (1997) The Lapita Peoples: ancestors of the Oceanic world. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford
Koganei Y (1893-94) Beiträge zur physische Anthropologies der Aino. Mittheilungen aus d. Medizinischen Fakultät der Kaiser. Jap.Universität, Tokyo
Li C (1977) Anyang. University of Washington Press, Seattle
Mahalanobis PC (1930) On tests and measures of group divergence. J. Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal 26:541-588
Mahalanobis PC (1936) On the generalized distance in statistics.Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences Calcutta 2:49-55
Mahalanobis PC (1949) Historical note on the D² statistic. InMahalanobis PC, Majumdar DN, Rao CR eds. Anthropometricsurvey of the united provinces, 1941: a statistical study. Sankhya 9 (2,3) Appendix 1, 237-240
Mahalanobis PC, Rao CR (1949) A note on the use of indices. In Mahalanobis PC, Majumdar DN, Rao CR eds. Anthropometric survey of the united provinces, 1941: a statistical study. Sankhya 9 (2, 3) Appendix 2, 240-246
Martin R, Saller K (1957) Lehrbuch der anthropologie. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart
Pearson K (1926) On the coefficient of racial likeness. Biometrika 18: 105-117
Pearson K (1928) Note on the standardization of method of using the coefficient of racial likeness. Biometrika 20: 376-378
Penrose LS (1954) Distance size and shape. Annals of Eugenics 18: 337-345
Pietrusewsky M (1969a) The physical anthropology of early Tongan populations: a study of bones and teeth and an assessment of theirbiological affinities based on cranial comparisons with eight otherPacific populations. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto
Pietrusewsky M (1969b) An osteological study of cranial andinfracranial remains from Tonga. Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum 6(4-6):287-402
Pietrusewsky (1970) An osteological view of indigenous populationsin Oceania. In Green RC, Kelly M eds. Studies in oceanic culture history. Pacific Anthropological Records, No. 11 Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, 1-11
50 51
Pietrusewsky M (1990) Craniofacial variation in Australasian andPacific populations. Am J Phys Anthropol 82:319-340
Pietrusewsky M (1992) Japan, Asia and the Pacific: a multivariatecraniometric investigation. In Hanihara K ed. Japanese as aMember of the Asian and Pacific Populations, InternationalResearch Center for Japanese Studies, Kyoto. InternationalSymposium No. 4, 9-52
Pietrusewsky M (1994) Pacific-Asian relationships: a physicalanthropological perspective. Oceanic Linguistics 33(2):407-430
Pietrusewsky M (1995) Taiwan aboriginals, Asians and PacificIslanders: a multivariate investigation of skulls. In Li P J-k, Tsang C-h, Huang Y-k, Ho D-a, and Tseng C-y eds. Austronesian studies relating to Taiwan. Taipei: Symposium Series of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, Vol. 3:295-351
Pietrusewsky M (2005) The physical anthropology of the Pacific, East Asia, and Southeast Asia: A multivariate craniometric analysis. In Sargat L, Blench R, Sanchez-Mazas A eds. The peopling of East Asia: Putting together archaeology, linguistics, and genetics. RoutledgeCurzon, London, 203-231
Pietrusewsky M (2006a) The initial settlement of remote Oceania: the evidence from physical anthropology. In Simanjuntak T, Pojoh, IHE, Hisyam M eds. Austronesian diaspora and the ethnogenesis of people in Indonesian Archipelago. Proceedings of the International Symposium, Jakarta, Indonesian Institute of Sciences,LIPI Press, Jakarta, 320-347
Pietrusewsky M (2006b) Chapter 3. A multivariate craniometric study of the prehistoric and modern inhabitants of Southeast Asia, East Asia, and surrounding regions: a human kaleidoscope? InOxenham MR, Tayles N eds. Bioarchaeology of Southeast Asia. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 59-90
Pietrusewsky M (2008a) The modern inhabitants of Island Southeast Asia: a craniometric perspective. In Indriati E ed. Proceedings of the international seminar on Southeast Asian paleoanthropology: Recent advances on Southeast Asian paleoanthropology andarchaeology. Laboratory of Bioanthropology and Paleoanthropology, Faculty of Medicine Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 185-201
Pietrusewsky M (2008b) Metric analysis of skeletal remains: methods and applications. In Katzenberg, MA, Saunders SR eds. Biological anthropology of the human skeleton, 2nd edition. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, 487-532.
Pietrusewsky M (2008c) Craniometric variation in Southeast Asia and neighboring regions: a multivariate analysis of cranial measurements.Hum Evol 23 (1-2):49-86.
Pietrusewsky M (2010) A multivariate analysis of measurementsrecorded in early and more modern crania from East Asia and Southeast Asia. Quaternary International 111: 42-54.
Pietrusewsky M, Douglas MT (2002) Ban Chiang, A prehistoric site in Northeast Thailand. I: The human skeletal remains. Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Pietrusewsky M, Li Y, Shao X-q, and Nguyen QQ (1992) Modern and near-modern populations of Asia and the Pacific: a multivariate craniometric interpretation In Akazawa T, Aoki K, Kimura T eds. The evolution and dispersal of modern humans in Asia. Hokusen-sha Publishing Co., Tokyo, 531-558.
Rao CR (1952) Advanced statistical methods in biomedical research. John Wiley, New York.
Rohlf FJ (1993) NTSYS-PC. Numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system, version 1.80.: Exeter software, Setauket, NewYork.
52 53
Sneath PHA, Sokal RR (1973) Numerical taxonomy. Freeman, San Francisco.
Tatsuoka MM (1971) Multivariate analysis: techniques for educational and psychological research. John Wiley and Sons, New York
Van Vark GN, Schaafsma W. (1992) Advances in the quantitativeanalysis of skeletal morphology. In Katzenberg MA, Saunders SR eds. Skeletal biology of past peoples: research methods. Wiley-Liss, New York, 225-257.
Visser E. (1994) The prehistoric people from Sigatoka: An analysis of skeletal and dental traits as evidence of adaptation. Ph.D. dissertation. Otago University, Dunedin.
Von Bonin F. (1931) A contribution to the craniology of the Easter Islanders. Biometrika 23:249-270.
Von Bonin F. (1936) On the craniology of Oceania. Crania from New Britain. Biometrika 28:123-147.
Wagner K (1937) The craniology of the Oceanic races. Skrifter utgitt av det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi i Oslo. I. Mat. – Naturv. Klasse. No 2.
White, T.D. (2000) Human Osteology, 2nd edition. Academic Press, New York.
Wilkinson L (1992) Systat for windows, version 5. Systat, Inc, Evanston, Illinois. T
able
1. T
hirt
y-tw
o co
mpa
rativ
e m
ale
cran
ial s
erie
s us
edin
the
pres
ent s
tudy
Sam
ple
(abb
revi
atio
ns)
No.
of
Cra
nia
Loca
tion1
and
Num
ber
Rem
arks
Eas
t Asi
aSh
angh
ai, C
hina
(SH
A)
50SH
A-5
0T
he s
peci
men
s ar
e m
ostly
from
pos
t-Q
ing
(pre
-191
1) c
emet
erie
s in
Sh
angh
ai.
Any
ang
(AN
Y)
56T
PE-5
6B
ronz
e-ag
e (1
1th
cent
ury
B.C
.) Sh
ang
Dyn
asty
cra
nia
exca
vate
d fr
om
‘sacr
ifici
al p
its’ a
t Any
ang,
Hen
an P
rovi
nce,
nor
ther
n C
hina
(Li,
1977
).A
taya
l(A
TY
)36
The
spe
cim
ens
are
Ata
yal,
the
seco
nd la
rges
t sur
vivi
ng A
borig
inal
tr
ibe
in T
aiw
an, s
lain
in th
e W
ushe
inci
dent
in 1
930.
The
spe
cim
ens
wer
e co
llect
ed b
y Ta
keo
Kan
asek
i in
1932
(How
ells,
198
9:10
9).
Man
chur
ia (M
AN
)50
TK
O-5
0M
any
of th
e sp
ecim
ens
are
from
nor
thea
ster
n C
hina
, a re
gion
for-
mer
ly re
ferr
ed to
as
“Man
chur
ia,”
whi
ch to
day
incl
udes
Hei
long
jiang
an
d Jil
in P
rovi
nces
and
adj
acen
t reg
ions
of
nort
hern
Kor
ea. A
gre
at
man
y of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
iden
tified
as
sold
iers
or c
aval
rym
en
who
die
d in
bat
tle in
the
late
19t
h ce
ntur
y A
.D.
54 55
Kor
ea(K
OR
)32
KY
O-7
;SE
N-3
; T
KM
-2; T
KO
-20
Spec
ific
loca
tions
in K
orea
are
kno
wn
for m
ost o
f th
ese
near
mod
-er
n sp
ecim
ens.
Mon
golia
(MO
G)
50SI
M-5
0T
he s
kulls
are
iden
tified
as
com
ing
from
Ula
anba
atar
(Urg
a), M
on-
golia
, whi
ch w
ere
purc
hase
d by
Ale
š H
rdlik
a in
191
2 fo
r the
Nat
iona
l M
useu
m o
f N
atur
al H
isto
ry in
Was
hing
ton,
D.C
.K
anto
, Jap
an(K
AN
)50
CH
B-5
0A
dis
sect
ing
room
sam
ple
of m
oder
n Ja
pane
se fr
om th
e K
anto
Dis
-tr
ict o
f ea
ster
n H
onsh
u. T
he m
ajor
ity o
f th
e in
divi
dual
s w
ere
born
du
ring
the
Mei
ji pe
riod
(186
8-19
11) a
nd m
ost d
ied
wel
l bef
ore
1940
.Jo
mon
(JO
M)
51T
KO
-16;
NSM
-19
;K
YO
-15;
SAP-
1
All
spec
imen
s re
pres
ent L
ate
to L
ates
t Jom
on s
ites
on H
onsh
u Is
land
. The
larg
est s
erie
s ar
e E
bish
ima
(11)
in I
wat
e Pr
efec
ture
in
Toho
ku D
istr
ict a
nd T
suku
mo
(12)
, Oka
yam
a Pr
efec
ture
in th
e C
hugo
ku D
istr
ict.
Ain
u(A
IN)
50SA
P-18
;T
KM
-5;
TK
O-2
7
Mod
ern
to n
ear m
oder
n sk
elet
ons
colle
cted
by
Yosh
ikiy
o K
ogan
ei
in 1
888-
89 fr
om a
band
oned
Ain
u ce
met
erie
s in
Hok
kaid
o (K
ogan
ei,
1893
-189
4).
Ryu
kyu
Isla
nds
(RY
U)
62K
YU
-34;
KY
O-
18;
TK
O-1
0
Spec
imen
s ar
e fr
om th
e Sa
kish
ima
(13)
, Oki
naw
a (1
3) a
nd A
mam
i (3
0) g
roup
s, re
spec
tivel
y. Si
x m
ore
are
iden
tified
onl
y as
Ryu
kyu
Isla
nd.
Mai
nlan
d So
uthe
ast A
sia
Vie
tnam
(VT
N)
49H
CM
-49
Nea
r mod
ern
cran
ia fr
om H
anoi
(Van
Die
n C
emet
ery)
and
Ho
Chi
M
inh
City
in V
ietn
am.
Cam
bodi
a &
La
os(C
AM
)
40PA
R-4
0A
com
bine
d sa
mpl
e of
cra
nia
from
var
ious
loca
tions
in C
ambo
dia
(11)
and
Lao
s (2
9) c
olle
cted
bet
wee
n 18
77 a
nd 1
920.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
Tha
iland
(TH
I)50
SIR
-50
Mos
t of
the
spec
imen
s re
pres
ent d
isse
ctin
g ro
om in
divi
dual
s fr
om
Ban
gkok
.
Isla
nd S
outh
east
Asi
aPh
ilipp
ines
(PH
L)28
BE
R-9
; DR
E-1
9M
ost s
peci
men
s ar
e fr
om L
uzon
Isl
and.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
56 57
Less
er S
unda
Is
land
s(L
SN)
45BA
S-5;
BE
R-6
; B
LU-2
; CH
A-1
; D
RE
-17;
LE
P-1;
PAR
-6;Z
UR
-7
Cra
nia
from
Bal
i, Fl
ores
, Sum
ba, L
ombl
em, A
lor,
Tim
or, W
etar
, Le
ti an
d B
arba
r Isl
ands
. The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not
know
n.
Bor
neo
(BO
R)
34B
ER
-2; B
RE
-2;
DR
E-6
; FR
E-4
;LE
P-8;
PA
R-1
2
A g
reat
man
y of
the
spec
imen
s ar
e in
dica
ted
as re
pres
entin
g D
ayak
tr
ibes
, som
e ha
ve e
labo
rate
dec
orat
ions
. The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
Java
(JAV
)50
BE
R-1
; B
LU-8
;C
HA
-9; D
RE
-1;
LEP-
24; P
AR
-7
Cra
nia
wer
e co
llect
ed fr
om s
ever
al d
iffer
ent l
ocal
ities
in Ja
va. T
he
exac
t dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Pol
ynes
iaE
aste
r Isl
and
(EA
S)50
BE
R-5
; DR
E-9
; PA
R-3
6M
ost o
f th
e cr
ania
in P
aris
wer
e co
llect
ed b
y Pi
nart
in 1
887
at V
aihu
an
d La
Per
ouse
Bay
, Eas
ter I
slan
d. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
i-m
ens
are
not k
now
n.
Haw
aii
(HA
W)
49B
PB-4
9Sp
ecim
ens
repr
esen
t pre
hist
oric
Haw
aiia
ns fr
om th
e M
okap
u Sa
nd
Dun
e si
te, O
`ahu
Isl
and.
Mar
ques
as(M
RQ
)63
PAR
-49;
LE
P-1;
BLU
-1;
BPB
-12
Cra
nia
are
from
four
isla
nds,
Fatu
Hiv
a, T
ahua
ta, N
uku
Hiv
a an
d H
iva
Oa.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
New
Zea
land
(NZ
)50
BR
E-3
;PA
R-2
1;SA
M-1
; AIM
-13;
G
OT-
1; Z
UR
-5;
DR
E-6
A re
pres
enta
tive
sam
ple
of N
ew Z
eala
nd M
aori
cran
ia fr
om th
e N
orth
and
Sou
th I
slan
ds o
f N
ew Z
eala
nd. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Tong
a-Sa
moa
(TO
G)
12B
ER
-3; A
MS-
1;
DR
E-1
; PA
R-1
;B
PB-4
;AIM
-2
Eig
ht s
peci
men
s ar
e fr
om T
onga
and
four
are
from
Sam
oa. T
wo
of th
e To
ngan
cra
nia
are
from
the
To-A
t-1,
2 s
ites
on T
onga
tapu
(P
ietr
usew
sky,
1969
a,b)
. The
exa
ct d
ates
of
the
rem
aini
ng s
peci
men
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Tahi
ti(T
AH
)44
PAR
-33;
BPB
-11
Cra
nia
are
from
the
isla
nd o
f Ta
hiti,
Soc
iety
Isl
ands
, Fre
nch
Poly
ne-
sia.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
58 59
Mic
rone
sia
Gua
m(G
UA
)46
BPB
-42;
PAR
-4Pr
e-Sp
anis
h C
ham
orro
cra
nia
asso
ciat
ed w
ith la
tte s
truc
ture
s co
llect
-ed
in th
e 19
20’s
by H
ans
Hor
nbos
tel a
long
Tum
on B
each
, Tum
on
Bay
, Gua
m. T
he m
ajor
ity o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s re
pres
ent p
rehi
stor
ic
(pre
-152
1) C
ham
orro
.M
elan
esia
Adm
iralty
Isl
ands
(AD
R)
50D
RE
-20;
GO
T-9;
CH
A-6
;T
UB
-15;
Spec
imen
s fr
om H
erm
it (2
2), K
anie
t (15
) and
Man
us (1
3) I
slan
ds o
f th
e A
dmira
lty I
slan
ds. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kn
own.
Van
uatu
(VA
N)
47BA
S-47
Mos
t of
the
spec
imen
s w
ere
colle
cted
by
Felix
Spe
iser
in 1
912
from
M
alo,
Pen
teco
st a
nd E
spirt
u Sa
nto
Isla
nds
of th
e A
dmira
lty I
slan
ds.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.Fi
ji Is
land
s(F
IJ)
32B
ER
-1; A
MS-
3;
PAR
-8; Q
MB
-1;
DR
E-4
; SA
M-3
; FR
E-3
; C
HA
-1;B
PB-8
Cra
nia
are
from
all
maj
or is
land
s in
clud
ing
the
Lau
Gro
up in
the
Fiji
Isla
nds.
The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
New
Brit
ain
(NB
R)
50C
HA
-20;
DR
E-
30M
ost o
f th
e cr
ania
in D
resd
en w
ere
colle
cted
by
Pöhl
in 1
887-
1888
fr
om th
e no
rthe
rn e
nd o
f th
e is
land
; the
spe
cim
ens
in G
öttin
gen
wer
e co
llect
ed d
urin
g th
e Sü
dsee
Exp
editi
on in
190
8. T
he e
xact
da
tes
of th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Sepi
k R
.(S
EP)
50D
RE
-33;
GO
T-10
;T
UB
-7
The
spe
cim
ens
in D
resd
en w
ere
colle
cted
by
Otto
Sch
lagi
nhau
fen
in 1
909
from
var
ious
loca
tions
alo
ng th
e Se
pik
Riv
er, P
apua
New
G
uine
a. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn
Aus
tral
ia/T
asm
ania
Mur
ray
R.
(MR
B)
50A
IA-3
9; D
AM
-11
Aus
tral
ian
Abo
rigin
al c
rani
a w
ere
colle
cted
by
G.M
. Bla
ck a
long
the
Mur
ray
Riv
er (C
how
illa
to C
oobo
ol) i
n N
ew S
outh
Wal
es b
etw
een
1929
and
195
0. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Nor
ther
n Te
rri-
tory
(NT
)
50A
IA-4
; AM
S-3;
M
MS-
1; N
MV-
38;
QM
B-1
; SA
M-3
Aus
tral
ian
Abo
rigin
al c
rani
a fr
om P
ort D
arw
in (3
9) a
nd A
rnhe
mla
nd
(36)
in th
e N
orth
ern
Terr
itory
, Aus
tral
ia. T
he e
xact
dat
es o
f th
ese
spec
imen
s ar
e no
t kno
wn.
Tasm
ania
(TA
S)26
TH
M-2
2; C
HA
-1;
SAM
-2; N
MV-
1T
he c
rani
a re
pres
ent T
asm
ania
n A
borig
ines
. The
exa
ct d
ates
of
thes
e sp
ecim
ens
are
not k
now
n.
60 61
1 AIM, Auckland Institute and Museum, Auckland, New Zealand; AIA, Australian Institute of Anatomy, Canberra, Australia; AMS, The Australian Museum, Sydney, Australia; AUK, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand; BAS, Naturhistorisches Museum, Basel, Swit-zerland; BER, Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin, Germany; BLU, Anat-omisches Institut, Universität Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany; BPB, B. P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, U.S.A.; BRE, Über-see Museum, Bre-men, Germany; CHA, Anatomisches Institut der Chairté, Humboldt Universität, Berlin, Germany; CHB, Chiba University School of Medi-cine, Chiba, Japan; DAM, Dept. of Anatomy, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; DRE, Museum für Völkerkunde, Dresden, Ger-many; DUN, Dept. of Anatomy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand; FRE, Institut für Humangenetik und Anthropologie, Uni-versität Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany ; GOT, Institut für Anthropologie, Universität Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany; HCM, Faculty of Medicine, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam; KYO, Physical An-thropology Laboratory, Faculty of Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan; KYU, Dept. of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Kyushu Univer-sity, Fukuoka, Japan; LEP, Anatomisches Institut, Karl Marx Univer-sität, Leipzig, Germany; MMS, Macleay Museum, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; NMV, National Museum of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia; NSM, National Science Museum, Tokyo; PAR, Musée de l’Homme, Paris, France; QMB, Queensland Museum, Brisbane, Aus-tralia; SAM, South Australian Museum, Adelaide, Australia; SAP, Dept. of Anatomy, Sapporo Medical College, Sapporo, Japan; SEN, Dept. of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan; SHA, Institute of Anthropology, College of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China; SIM, National Museum of Natural History, Smith-sonian Institution, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.; SIR, Dept. of Anatomy, Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand; THM, Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery, Hobart, Australia; TKM, Medical Museum, University Mu-seum, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan; TKO, University Museum, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan; TPE, Academia Sinica, Nankang, Taipei, Taiwan; TUB, Institut für Anthropologie u. Humangenetik, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany; ZUR, Anthropologisches Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Table 2. A ranking of 19 cranial measurements for 33 male groups according to F-values received in the final step
of discriminant function analysis
Step No. Measurement1 F-Value d.f.B/d.f.w2 P3
1 Maximum cranial breadth (M-8)
41.125 17/757 *
2 Alveolar length (M-60) 31.692 2/89 *3 Basion-nasion length (M-5) 26.204 17/756 *4 Nasion-prosthion (MH-
NPH)22.351 16/711 *
5 Maximum cranial length (M-1)
11.952 22/977 *
6 Nasion-bregma chord (M-29)
11.990 8/355 *
7 Alveolar Breadth (M-61) 11.523 20/887 *8 Malar length, inferior (H-
IML)9.941 16/709 *
9 Biauricular breadth (M-11b)
9.708 18/797 *
10 Cheek height (H-WMH) 8.915 4/177 *11 Nasio-frontal subtense
(H-NAS)8.411 9/398 *
12 Nasal Breadth (M-54) 7.733 16/707 *13 Maximum frontal breadth
(M-10)5.243 19/839 *
14 Bregma-lambda chord (M-30)
4.848 8/353 *
15 Interorbital breadth I (PD) 4.715 21/926 *16 Bifrontal breadth (M-43) 4.574 16/705 *17 Bistephanic breadth (H-
STB)4.262 22/969 *
18 Biasterionic breadth (M-12) 2.677 1/44 *19 Minimum frontal breadth
(M-9)1.928 22/967 *
1 M= Martin and Saller (1957); H = Howells (1973); PD= (Pietrusewsky and Douglas, 2002) 2 d.f.B/d.f.w = degrees of freedom between/degrees of freedom within.3 p<.01
62 63
Table 3. Eigenvalues, percentage of total dispersion, cumulative percentage of dispersion and level of significance of the first 10 canonical variates using 19 measurements and 33 male groups
CanonicalVariate
Eigenvalues % Dispersion
Cumulative%
Dispersion
d.f.1 p2
1 2.76364 43.4 43.4 50 *2 1.00791 15.8 59.2 48 *3 0.49255 7.7 66.9 46 *4 0.44851 7.1 74.0 44 *5 0.36433 5.7 79.7 42 *6 0.26831 4.2 83.9 40 *7 0.24221 3.8 87.7 38 *8 0.17252 2.8 90.5 36 *9 0.11844 1.8 92.3 34 *10 0.10546 1.7 94.0 32 *
1d.f. = degrees of freedom = (p + q - 2) + (p + q - 4)...2p<.01 when eigenvalues are tested for significance according to Bartlett’s criterion [N - 1/2(p + q)] loge (1 + λ), where N = total number of crania, p = number of variables, q = number of groups, λ = eigenvalue, which are distributed approximately as chi-square (Rao, 1952:323).
Table 4. Canonical coefficients for 19 cranial measurementsrecorded in 33 male groups for the first three canonical variates
Variable1 Canonical Variate 1
Coefficient
Canonical Variate 2
Coefficient
Canonical Variate 3
Coefficient
Maximum cranial length (M-1)
-0.00776 -0.04812 -0.12371
Basion-nasion length (M-5) 0.07799 -0.17555 0.02708Maximum cranial breadth (M-8)
0.03710 0.07777 -0.03078
Maximum frontal breadth (M-10)
-0.00508 0.06725 -0.05079
Bistephanic breadth (H-STB)
0.04462 -0.04874 0.01008
Biauricular breadth (M-11b) 0.05175 -0.06158 0.02447Biasterionic breadth (M-12) -0.01687 0.00630 -0.03929Nasion-prosthion (MH-NPH)
0.08906 0.04390 0.05290
Nasal breadth (M-54) -0.03884 0.12534 0.11440Alveolar length (M-60) -0.20417 -0.05022 0.01597Alveolar breadth (M-61) -0.03872 0.10547 0.09927Bifrontal breadth (M-43) -0.01422 -0.03581 -0.09709Interorbital breadth I (PD) -0.01879 0.14067 0.06111Malar length, inferior (H-IML)
-0.07996 0.06170 0.10392
Cheek height (H-WMH) 0.14043 -0.01649 0.10143Nasion-bregma chord (M-29)
-0.01692 -0.05736 0.14051
Bregma-lambda chord (M-30)
-0.00412 0.02789 0.01438
Nasio-frontal subtense (H-NAS)
-0.09800 0.05130 0.07774
1 M= Martin and Saller (1957); H = Howells (1973); PD= (Pietrusewsky and Douglas, 2002).
64 65
Figure 1. Locations of the comparative cranial series used inthe present analyses
Figure 2. Plot of 33 group means on the first two canonical variates using 19 cranial measurements (see Table 1 for an
explanation of the group abbreviations)
66 67
Figure 3. Diagram of relationship (dendrogram) based on a cluster analysis (UPGMA) of Mahalanobis’ generalized
distances using 19 cranial measurements recorded in 33 male groups
Chapter 3
Degree of inbreeding and fluctuating asymmetry in a subdivided caste of Andhra Pradesh, India
B. Mohan Reddy1#, Alexa Pfeffer2, Shilpi Dasgupta1, P.V.S. Sirisha1 and MH Crawford2
1Molecular Anthropology Group, Biological Anthropology Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Hyderabad
2 Laboratory for Biological Anthropology, Department of Anthropology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas
#Corresponding author
Abstract
We examined fluctuating asymmetry of the a-b ridge count in relation to the degree of inbreeding in the members of endogamous subcastes of Gollas in Andhra Pradesh, India. The a-b ridge counts were scored on a sample of 319 adult male from which dermal prints were collect-ed. These samples were collected from 30 villages spread over 9 taluks of Chittoor district in Andhra Pradesh and belong to 7 endogamous sub-castes of a traditionally nomadic shepherd caste called Golla. The results do not suggest significant association between degree of in-breeding and fluctuating asymmetry in any of the sub-castes or in a pooled sample of Gollas. The long term inbreeding of the southern Indian populations, which is not usually considered, is interpreted as possible confounding factor that might have reduced the differences in fluctuating asymmetry between inbred and non-inbred samples.
Key words: Consanguinity, inbreeding coefficient, fluctuating asym-metry of a-b ridge count, phenotypic value, heterozygosity.
Introduction
Fluctuating asymmetry (FA) is the absolute difference between the right and left measurements in paired structures (Markow and Martin,
footnotes for Table 3
1d.f. = degrees of freedom = (p + q - 2) + (p + q - 4)... 2p<.01 when eigenvalues are tested for significance according to Bartlett's criterion [N - 1/2(p + q)] loge (1 + λ), where N = total number of crania, p = number of variables, q = number of groups, λ = eigenvalue, which are distributed approximately as chi-square (Rao, 1952:323).
