Literature DB >> 1746645

Articular and diaphyseal remodeling of the proximal femur with changes in body mass in adults.

C B Ruff1, W W Scott, A Y Liu.   

Abstract

Proximal femoral dimensions were measured from radiographs of 80 living subjects whose current body weight and body weight at initial skeletal maturity (18 years) could be ascertained. Results generally support the hypothesis that articular size does not change in response to changes in mechanical loading (body weight) in adults, while diaphyseal cross-sectional size does. This can be explained by considering the different bone remodeling constraints characteristic of largely trabecular bone regions (articulations) and largely compact cortical bone regions (diaphyses). The femoral neck shows a pattern apparently intermediate between the two, consistent with its structure. When the additional statistical "noise" created by an essentially static femoral head size is accounted for, the present study supports other studies that have demonstrated rather marked positive allometry in femoral articular and shaft cross-sectional dimensions to body mass among adult humans. Body weight prediction equations developed from these data give reasonable results for modern U.S. samples, with average percent prediction errors of about 10%-16% for individual weights and about 2% for sample mean weights using the shaft dimension equations. When predicting body weight from femoral head size in earlier human samples, a downward correction factor of about 10% is suggested to account for the increased adiposity of very recent U.S. adults.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1746645     DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.1330860306

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol        ISSN: 0002-9483            Impact factor:   2.868


  32 in total

1.  The shape of the hominoid proximal femur: a geometric morphometric analysis.

Authors:  Elizabeth H Harmon
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 2.610

2.  Estimation of African apes' body size from postcranial dimensions.

Authors:  Markku Niskanen; Juho-Antti Junno
Journal:  Primates       Date:  2009-02-17       Impact factor: 2.163

3.  Age-related trends in vertebral dimensions.

Authors:  Juho-Antti Junno; Markus Paananen; Jaro Karppinen; Jaakko Niinimäki; Markku Niskanen; Heli Maijanen; Tiina Väre; Marjo-Riitta Järvelin; Miika T Nieminen; Juha Tuukkanen; Christopher Ruff
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 2.610

4.  The hominid ilium is shaped by a synapomorphic growth mechanism that is unique within primates.

Authors:  Dexter Zirkle; C Owen Lovejoy
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  New insights into differences in brain organization between Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans.

Authors:  Eiluned Pearce; Chris Stringer; R I M Dunbar
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Quantification of anatomical variation at the atlanto-occipital articulation: morphometric resolution of commingled human remains within the repatriation documentation process.

Authors:  J Christopher Dudar; Eric R Castillo
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 2.610

7.  Constraint, natural selection, and the evolution of human body form.

Authors:  Kristen R R Savell; Benjamin M Auerbach; Charles C Roseman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Human variation in the shape of the birth canal is significant and geographically structured.

Authors:  Lia Betti; Andrea Manica
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2018-10-24       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Mapping the natural variation in whole bone stiffness and strength across skeletal sites.

Authors:  Stephen H Schlecht; Erin M R Bigelow; Karl J Jepsen
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 4.398

10.  Axial and appendicular skeletal transformations, ligament alterations, and motor neuron loss in Hoxc10 mutants.

Authors:  Sirkka Liisa Hostikka; Jun Gong; Ellen M Carpenter
Journal:  Int J Biol Sci       Date:  2009-06-03       Impact factor: 6.580

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.