Climatic and behavioural influences on postcranial robusticity among holocene foragers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postcranial morphology is commonly used as the basis for interpreting human behavioral and environmental adaptations in the past. Recent evidence suggests that diaphyseal morphology may be subject to climatic influences; further, there may be a selective gradient in which distal elements are subject to tighter climatic and biomechanical constraints than proximal elements are. Hence, the influence of climate and behaviour may differ throughout the skeleton. This dissertation compares the postcranial robusticity of four groups of foragers, to elucidate behavioral and climatic (quantified using effective temperature) influences on diaphyseal morphology. Foraging groups include early historic Andaman Islanders (n = 32), Later Stone Age southern Africans (n = 83), archaic foragers from southern Ontario (n = 15) and late prehistoric Tierra del Fuegians (n = 34). Diaphyseal cross-sectional geometry is quantified for the clavicles, humeri and ulnae bilaterally, and femora and tibiae unilaterally. Body size standardized geometric properties are compared using analysis of covariance and canonical variates analysis. Climatic influences on skeletal robusticity are strong at some skeletal sites, especially the subtrochanteric femur location. The midshaft femoral shape and robusticity of the femur are strongly correlated with terrestrial mobility, among male and female sub-samples. In the upper body, diaphyseal strengths are strongly correlated with marine mobility. There is no correspondence between upper body bilateral asymmetry and material technology, but males have higher levels of asymmetry than females in all groups. Overall, diaphyseal robusticity corresponds with patterns of terrestrial and marine mobility. The positive relationship between robusticity and habitual behaviour is strongest in the distal limb elements. Thus, there is less disparity between observed morphological variability and functional adaptation in the distal elements. This dissertation demonstrates that it is possible to partition climatic and behavioural influences on the skeleton. It is therefore possible to interpret habitual activity of foragers from diaphyseal robusticity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".