Premium
Sexual dimorphism in the pelvic midplane and its relationship to Neandertal reproductive patterns
Author(s) -
Walrath Dana E.,
Glantz Michelle M.
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
american journal of physical anthropology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.146
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1096-8644
pISSN - 0002-9483
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1096-8644(199605)100:1<89::aid-ajpa9>3.0.co;2-8
Subject(s) - pelvis , sexual dimorphism , population , biology , bivariate analysis , anatomy , context (archaeology) , demography , zoology , statistics , mathematics , paleontology , sociology
The fragmentary nature of the fossil record has limited the analysis of the Neandertal pelvis to the superior pubic ramus and the pelvic inlet. From an obstetric viewpoint, the pelvic midplane or “plane of least dimensions,” defined by the distance between the ischial spines, must be considered in the analysis of hominid reproduction. We examined the relationship between BSD and weight in a mixed sex hospital population undergoing diagnostic computed tomography (CT) scans (41 females and 40 males). Because femoral head diameter squared (FH 2 ) has been used as a proxy for weight in skeletal populations, it was also analyzed with respect to BSD and weight. Bivariate regression analysis of BSD with other body dimensions indicates the presence of significant sex differences. In females, but not in males, weight is a statistically significant predictor of BSD. FH 2 is an even better predictor of BSD in females while nonsignificant in males. Although weight and FH 2 are significantly correlated with BSD in females, FH 2 does not predict weight in females as well as it does in males. The positive correlation between skeletal frame size and BSD in females is indicative of an evolutionary pattern that must take into account the pressures of reproduction. Our results indicate that critical dimensions of the pelvis must increase as the maternal skeleton becomes larger. These results provide a context for the interpretation of the reproductive patterns of a relatively robust hominid population like the Neandertals. © 1996 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.