| Literature DB >> 33773064 |
Olivia Cheronet1, Abigail Ash2, Alexandra Anders3, János Dani4, László Domboróczki5, Eva Drozdova6, Michael Francken7, Marija Jovanovic8, Lidija Milasinovic9, Ildiko Pap10, Pál Raczky3, Maria Teschler-Nicola1,11, Zdeněk Tvrdý12, Joachim Wahl13, Gunita Zariņa14, Ron Pinhasi1.
Abstract
Cranial sutures join the many bones of the skull. They are therefore points of weakness and consequently subjected to the many mechanical stresses affecting the cranium. However, the way in which this impacts their morphological complexity remains unclear. We examine the intrinsic and extrinsic mechanisms of human sagittal sutures by quantifying the morphology from 107 individuals from archaeological populations spanning the Mesolithic to Middle ages, using standardized two-dimensional photographs. Results show that the most important factor determining sutural complexity appears to be the position along the cranial vault from the junction with the coronal suture at its anterior-most point to the junction with the lambdoid suture at its posterior-most point. Conversely, factors such as age and lifeways show few trends in complexity, the most significant of which is a lower complexity in the sutures of Mesolithic individuals who consumed a tougher diet. The simple technique used in this study therefore allowed us to identify that, taken together, structural aspects play a more important role in defining the complexity of the human sagittal suture than extrinsic factors such as the mechanical forces imposed on the cranium by individuals' diet.Entities:
Keywords: archaeology; morphology; quantification; sagittal suture
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33773064 PMCID: PMC9291749 DOI: 10.1002/ar.24627
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anat Rec (Hoboken) ISSN: 1932-8486 Impact factor: 2.227
Summary statistics of the individuals included in this study. “n” indicates the sample size for each category. For each of the three indicators of suture morphology, the mean is given followed by the standard deviation in brackets
| Complexity index | Maximum extent | Crossings | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Adolescent ( | 3.376(±0.992) | 0.271(±0.047) | 44.167(±14.796) |
| Young adult ( | 3.369(±0.741) | 0.279(±0.073) | 46.952(±9.255) |
| Young middle adult ( | 3.822(±1.022) | 0.362(±0.221) | 47.458(±11.248) |
| Old middle adult ( | 3.628(±1.237) | 0.298(±0.158) | 45.762(±9.879) |
| Old adult ( | 3.222(±0.541) | 0.256(±0.059) | 54.286(±5.282) |
| Mature adult ( | 3.134(±—) | 0.189(±—) | 46(±—) |
|
| |||
| Male ( | 3.348(±0.946) | 0.32(±0.101) | 47.059(±10.418) |
| Female ( | 3.514(±1.019) | 0.28(±0.172) | 47.333(±9.779) |
|
| |||
| Mesolithic ( | 2.685(±0.721) | 0.263(±0.038) | 47.091(±10.653) |
| Neolithic ( | 3.547(±1.138) | 0.296(±0.118) | 45.364(±10.744) |
| Eneolithic ( | 3.003(±0.681) | 0.283(±0.053) | 49.571(±5.255) |
| Bronze age ( | 3.509(±0.927) | 0.314(±0.123) | 46.571(±9.271) |
| Iron age ( | 3.351(±0.825) | 0.267(±0.052) | 48.063(±9.132) |
| Medieval ( | 3.679(±0.924) | 0.335(±0.253) | 47.737(±11.883) |
|
| |||
| First quarter ( | 3.009(±1.011) | 0.171(±0.051) | 13.972(±5.233) |
| Second quarter ( | 3.987(±1.26) | 0.236(±0.053) | 11.561(±3.112) |
| Third quarter ( | 3.514(±1.189) | 0.217(±0.051) | 10.689(±3.495) |
| Fourth quarter ( | 3.825(±1.968) | 0.249(±0.155) | 10.962(±4.249) |
FIGURE 1Quantification of the sagittal suture. (a) Standardized orientation for sagittal suture photography, as viewed through the camera. Point M, lambda (l) and bregma (b) are indicated. (b) Suture measurements and complexity indices calculated
FIGURE 2Variation of morphological complexity along the human sagittal suture. The significance of differences between sections was assessed by Mann Whitney test (*p value ≥ .05; **p value ≥ .01; ***p value ≥ .001)
FIGURE 3Variation of morphological complexity with individual age. The significance of differences between age groups was assessed by Mann Whitney test (*p value ≥ .05; **p value ≥ .01; ***p value ≥ .001)
FIGURE 4Variation of morphological complexity with individual age and separated by sex. The significance of differences between each category was assessed by Mann Whitney test (*p value ≥.05; **p value ≥ .01; ***p value ≥ .001). Blue bars represent males, and red bars represent females
FIGURE 5Variation of morphological complexity with archaeological periods. The significance of differences between periods was assessed by Mann Whitney test (*p value ≥ .05; **p value ≥ .01; ***p value ≥ .001)