法医学中青少年年龄估计的新方法:通过Shackelford等人的过渡分析的应用。方法:不同现代亚成人标本

4区 生物学 Q2 Medicine
Kelly R. Kamnikar, Nicholas P. Herrmann, A. Plemons
{"title":"法医学中青少年年龄估计的新方法:通过Shackelford等人的过渡分析的应用。方法:不同现代亚成人标本","authors":"Kelly R. Kamnikar, Nicholas P. Herrmann, A. Plemons","doi":"10.1353/hub.2017.0048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"abstract:Dental development is one of the most widely utilized and accurate methods available for estimating age in subadult skeletal remains. The timing of tooth growth and development is regulated by genetics and less afffected by external factors, allowing reliable estimates of chronological age. Traditional methodology focuses on comparing tooth developmental scores to corresponding age charts. Using the Moorrees, Fanning, and Hunt (MFH) developmental scores, Shackelford and colleagues embed the dental development method in a statistical framework based on transition analysis. They generated numerical parameters underlining each \"stage\" and age-at-death distribution and applied them to fossil hominins and Neanderthals with limited application to modern humans. We use this same method on a subadult test sample (n = 201), representing modern individuals that may become part of the forensic record. We assess the probability coverage of the Shackelford et al. method derived from MFH standards as it applies to all available dentition. Results indicate promise: the age range at 90% and 95% confidence levels includes the chronological age of almost every individual tested. The maximum likelihood age estimates underestimate age by 0.5–2.5 years for individuals 0–15 years of age and by >2.5 years for individuals 16–18 years of age, as previously shown. In an attempt to refine the method, we adjusted the numerical parameters underlying the stages for developing teeth based on a combined modern reference sample (n = 1,964) and tested these revised parameters using the same test sample. The estimated ages from the modified method difffer from the original Shackelford et al. methodology by underestimating age to a lesser degree. The modified method does include mean age-at-attainment values for earlier stages of several teeth, allowing for the calculation of narrower confidence intervals. While this study highlights areas of future research in refining dental developmental aging by transition analysis, it also demonstrates that the Shackelford et al. method is applicable and accurate when aging modern subadults in forensic work.","PeriodicalId":13053,"journal":{"name":"Human Biology","volume":"52 1","pages":"11 - 30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New Approaches to Juvenile Age Estimation in Forensics: Application of Transition Analysis via the Shackelford et al. Method to a Diverse Modern Subadult Sample\",\"authors\":\"Kelly R. Kamnikar, Nicholas P. Herrmann, A. Plemons\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/hub.2017.0048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"abstract:Dental development is one of the most widely utilized and accurate methods available for estimating age in subadult skeletal remains. The timing of tooth growth and development is regulated by genetics and less afffected by external factors, allowing reliable estimates of chronological age. Traditional methodology focuses on comparing tooth developmental scores to corresponding age charts. Using the Moorrees, Fanning, and Hunt (MFH) developmental scores, Shackelford and colleagues embed the dental development method in a statistical framework based on transition analysis. They generated numerical parameters underlining each \\\"stage\\\" and age-at-death distribution and applied them to fossil hominins and Neanderthals with limited application to modern humans. We use this same method on a subadult test sample (n = 201), representing modern individuals that may become part of the forensic record. We assess the probability coverage of the Shackelford et al. method derived from MFH standards as it applies to all available dentition. Results indicate promise: the age range at 90% and 95% confidence levels includes the chronological age of almost every individual tested. The maximum likelihood age estimates underestimate age by 0.5–2.5 years for individuals 0–15 years of age and by >2.5 years for individuals 16–18 years of age, as previously shown. In an attempt to refine the method, we adjusted the numerical parameters underlying the stages for developing teeth based on a combined modern reference sample (n = 1,964) and tested these revised parameters using the same test sample. The estimated ages from the modified method difffer from the original Shackelford et al. methodology by underestimating age to a lesser degree. The modified method does include mean age-at-attainment values for earlier stages of several teeth, allowing for the calculation of narrower confidence intervals. While this study highlights areas of future research in refining dental developmental aging by transition analysis, it also demonstrates that the Shackelford et al. method is applicable and accurate when aging modern subadults in forensic work.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13053,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Biology\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"11 - 30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/hub.2017.0048\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Biology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hub.2017.0048","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

牙齿发育是估计亚成人骨骼遗骸年龄最广泛和最准确的方法之一。牙齿生长和发育的时间受基因的影响,受外部因素的影响较小,因此可以可靠地估计实际年龄。传统的方法侧重于将牙齿发育评分与相应的年龄图表进行比较。利用Moorrees, Fanning, and Hunt (MFH)发育评分,Shackelford和同事将牙齿发育方法嵌入到基于过渡分析的统计框架中。他们生成了强调每个“阶段”和死亡年龄分布的数值参数,并将其应用于古人类化石和尼安德特人,但对现代人的应用有限。我们对亚成人测试样本(n = 201)使用相同的方法,代表可能成为法医记录一部分的现代个体。我们评估了来自MFH标准的Shackelford等方法的概率覆盖率,因为它适用于所有可用的牙列。结果显示出希望:在90%和95%置信水平上的年龄范围包括几乎每个被测试个体的实足年龄。如前所述,最大似然年龄估计对0-15岁的个体低估了0.5-2.5岁,对16-18岁的个体低估了>2.5岁。为了改进该方法,我们根据合并的现代参考样本(n = 1964)调整了牙齿发育阶段的数值参数,并使用相同的测试样本测试了这些修改后的参数。修正后的方法估计的年龄与最初的Shackelford等人的方法不同,低估了年龄的程度较小。修改后的方法确实包括了几颗牙齿早期发育阶段的平均年龄值,允许计算更窄的置信区间。虽然这项研究强调了通过过渡分析来细化牙齿发育老化的未来研究领域,但它也表明,Shackelford等人的方法在法医工作中对现代亚成人进行老化时是适用的和准确的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
New Approaches to Juvenile Age Estimation in Forensics: Application of Transition Analysis via the Shackelford et al. Method to a Diverse Modern Subadult Sample
abstract:Dental development is one of the most widely utilized and accurate methods available for estimating age in subadult skeletal remains. The timing of tooth growth and development is regulated by genetics and less afffected by external factors, allowing reliable estimates of chronological age. Traditional methodology focuses on comparing tooth developmental scores to corresponding age charts. Using the Moorrees, Fanning, and Hunt (MFH) developmental scores, Shackelford and colleagues embed the dental development method in a statistical framework based on transition analysis. They generated numerical parameters underlining each "stage" and age-at-death distribution and applied them to fossil hominins and Neanderthals with limited application to modern humans. We use this same method on a subadult test sample (n = 201), representing modern individuals that may become part of the forensic record. We assess the probability coverage of the Shackelford et al. method derived from MFH standards as it applies to all available dentition. Results indicate promise: the age range at 90% and 95% confidence levels includes the chronological age of almost every individual tested. The maximum likelihood age estimates underestimate age by 0.5–2.5 years for individuals 0–15 years of age and by >2.5 years for individuals 16–18 years of age, as previously shown. In an attempt to refine the method, we adjusted the numerical parameters underlying the stages for developing teeth based on a combined modern reference sample (n = 1,964) and tested these revised parameters using the same test sample. The estimated ages from the modified method difffer from the original Shackelford et al. methodology by underestimating age to a lesser degree. The modified method does include mean age-at-attainment values for earlier stages of several teeth, allowing for the calculation of narrower confidence intervals. While this study highlights areas of future research in refining dental developmental aging by transition analysis, it also demonstrates that the Shackelford et al. method is applicable and accurate when aging modern subadults in forensic work.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Biology
Human Biology 生物-生物学
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
88
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Biology publishes original scientific articles, brief communications, letters to the editor, and review articles on the general topic of biological anthropology. Our main focus is understanding human biological variation and human evolution through a broad range of approaches. We encourage investigators to submit any study on human biological diversity presented from an evolutionary or adaptive perspective. Priority will be given to interdisciplinary studies that seek to better explain the interaction between cultural processes and biological processes in our evolution. Methodological papers are also encouraged. Any computational approach intended to summarize cultural variation is encouraged. Studies that are essentially descriptive or concern only a limited geographic area are acceptable only when they have a wider relevance to understanding human biological variation. Manuscripts may cover any of the following disciplines, once the anthropological focus is apparent: human population genetics, evolutionary and genetic demography, quantitative genetics, evolutionary biology, ancient DNA studies, biological diversity interpreted in terms of adaptation (biometry, physical anthropology), and interdisciplinary research linking biological and cultural diversity (inferred from linguistic variability, ethnological diversity, archaeological evidence, etc.).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信