Grooves in the preauricular area of the human ilium as indicator of sex or traces of parturition: historical background with a test of Novotný's method.

Abstract

This paper summarizes the history of the study of bone surface depressions near the contact surfaces of the sacroiliac joint, or grooves located below the linea terminalis, known in the literature as "scars of parturition" or "pelvic scars". Since the beginning of the 20^th century, the "sulcus praeauricularis" has been confused with the "sulcus paraglenoidalis" without a satisfactory explanation of their aetiology. Any groove in the preauricular area of the pelvic bone has been referred to as an indicator of female sex and used in sex estimation in a way that does not respect the nature of sex differences. Novotný (1979) included bone structures, which were described by various authors in both females and males, in his method of holistic evaluation. He proposed a three-step categorization for the evaluation of the bone surface of the pelvic preauricular area (three sub-characteristics scored independently) in order to distinguish the sulcus praeauricularis as a female trait from other structures that may occur in both sexes. However, Novotný's work did not become widely known. Testing of the Novotný method was performed in four groups of individuals of known sex without knowledge of the reproductive history of the females (Novotný 1981; Bruzek 2002; Mikešová 2008) and included a total of 852 pelvic bones (457 male and 395 female). The results showed that female morphology, which is characterized by the presence of various forms of sulcus praeauricularis, occurred in a total of 270 of 395 females (68.3%). Female morphology was found in only 5 of 457 males (1.1%). Male morphology was observed in 419 of 457 males (91.7%), but also in 11.1% of females (44 of 395). Indeterminate or ambiguous morphology was found in 33 of 457 males (7.2%) and 81 of 395 females (20.5%). The application of the Novotný method showed that of the total 275 specimens with female morphology, 98.2% were females and only 1.8% were males. It is therefore appropriate to use this reliable method to estimate the sex of skeletal samples. To test the relationship between morphology and obstetric history in females it is necessary to use a sample with known parity.