TY - JOUR
T1 - Histological age assessment in a prehispanic Maya sample from Xcambó, Yucatan, Mexico
T2 - Benefits and limitations
AU - Suzuki, Shintaro
AU - Maggiano, Isabel Sora
N1 - Funding Information:
Shintaro Suzuki received partial financial support from the Suntory Foundation (Japan) and JSPS KAKENHI, Grant Number 17K17754 , during the preparation of the manuscript. The work was carried out at the Bioarchaeology Laboratory, Department of Anthropology, Autonomous University of Yucatan, Km 1 Carr. Merida Tizimin, C.P. 97305, Merida, Yucatan, Mexico. We thank Dr. Vera Tiesler, director of the lab, and her team, for kindly collaborated with us. We thank two anonymous reviewers and Corey Maggiano for their very valuable comments.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2018/12
Y1 - 2018/12
N2 - The present study explores four different regression formulae for the histological assessment of age at death in ribs and their performance in a prehispanic Classic Maya population sample consisting of 57 individuals from Xcambó, Yucatan, Mexico. Regressions employed include the original age regression formula by Stout and Paine (1992), Cho et al.'s (2002) two formulae for samples of indeterminate ethnicity, as well as a formula published by Valencia et al. (2010) adjusted specifically for populations of Maya descent. In addition to applying these methods, we report histomorphometric variables (total cortical area (TA), cortical area (CA), relative cortical area (CA/TA%), osteon population density (OPD), and osteon cross-sectional area (On.Ar.)) from the 6th rib and compare these variables across groups within our sample defined by macroscopic age and sex, as well as with results reported for modern reference samples used by Cho et al. and Valencia and colleagues. Our study shows mean CA and CA/TA% are relatively high across all ages in the prehispanic Maya sample, especially in females, indicating a high degree of robusticity. OPD is high when compared with samples used by Cho et al., but similar to the modern Maya reference sample. Comparison of histological age at death estimates reveals interesting patterns of deviation; specifically Cho et al.'s formulae both deviate strongly from all other age estimates. Calculated mean net difference between Cho et al.'s and macroscopic age estimates, for example, is nearly 16 years. Both, Stout and Paine, and Valencia et al., result in age reconstructions more similar to macroscopic estimates (mean net difference around 8 years). Since Cho et al.'s formulae are unique in employing On.Ar., CA, and TA, in addition to OPD, OPD-based regression formulae may perform better in archaeological samples. However, some of the deviation observed could result from differences in histomorphometric variables between modern reference and archaeological samples, the outcome of complex biocultural processes. Continued analyses of histomorphological variation between differing reference and archaeological samples will be necessary to improve histological assessments of age at death in archaeological contexts.
AB - The present study explores four different regression formulae for the histological assessment of age at death in ribs and their performance in a prehispanic Classic Maya population sample consisting of 57 individuals from Xcambó, Yucatan, Mexico. Regressions employed include the original age regression formula by Stout and Paine (1992), Cho et al.'s (2002) two formulae for samples of indeterminate ethnicity, as well as a formula published by Valencia et al. (2010) adjusted specifically for populations of Maya descent. In addition to applying these methods, we report histomorphometric variables (total cortical area (TA), cortical area (CA), relative cortical area (CA/TA%), osteon population density (OPD), and osteon cross-sectional area (On.Ar.)) from the 6th rib and compare these variables across groups within our sample defined by macroscopic age and sex, as well as with results reported for modern reference samples used by Cho et al. and Valencia and colleagues. Our study shows mean CA and CA/TA% are relatively high across all ages in the prehispanic Maya sample, especially in females, indicating a high degree of robusticity. OPD is high when compared with samples used by Cho et al., but similar to the modern Maya reference sample. Comparison of histological age at death estimates reveals interesting patterns of deviation; specifically Cho et al.'s formulae both deviate strongly from all other age estimates. Calculated mean net difference between Cho et al.'s and macroscopic age estimates, for example, is nearly 16 years. Both, Stout and Paine, and Valencia et al., result in age reconstructions more similar to macroscopic estimates (mean net difference around 8 years). Since Cho et al.'s formulae are unique in employing On.Ar., CA, and TA, in addition to OPD, OPD-based regression formulae may perform better in archaeological samples. However, some of the deviation observed could result from differences in histomorphometric variables between modern reference and archaeological samples, the outcome of complex biocultural processes. Continued analyses of histomorphological variation between differing reference and archaeological samples will be necessary to improve histological assessments of age at death in archaeological contexts.
KW - Age
KW - Bioarchaeology
KW - Bone histomorphology
KW - Maya
KW - OPD
KW - Relative cortical area
KW - Skeletal biology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054457989&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85054457989&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jasrep.2018.09.029
DO - 10.1016/j.jasrep.2018.09.029
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85054457989
VL - 22
SP - 214
EP - 222
JO - Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports
JF - Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports
SN - 2352-409X
ER -