Complex variation of trabecular bone structure in the proximal humerus and femur of five modern human populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This project investigates trabecular bone structural variation in the proximal humerus and femur of hunter-gatherer, mixed-strategy agricultural, medieval, and human groups to address three questions: (a) What is the extent of trabecular bone structural variation in the humerus and femur between populations with different inferred activity levels? (b) How does variation in the proximal humerus relate to variation in the proximal femur? (c) Are trabecular bone microstructural variables sexually dimorphic? METHODS: The proximal humerus and femur of 73 adults from five human groups with distinct subsistence strategies were scanned using a micro-computed tomography system. Centralized volumes of interest within the humeral and femoral heads were extracted and analyzed to quantify bone volume fraction, trabecular thickness, trabecular separation, connectivity density, degree of anisotropy, and bone surface density. RESULTS: In the humerus and femur, groups with the highest inferred activity levels have higher bone volume fraction and trabecular thickness, and lower bone surface density than those with lower inferred activity levels. However, the humeral pattern does not exactly mirror that of the femur, which demonstrates a steeper gradient of difference between subsistence groups. No significant differences were identified in trabecular separation. No consistent patterns of sexual dimorphism were present in the humerus or femur. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced skeletal robusticity of proximal humeral and femoral trabecular bone corresponds with reduced activity level inferred from subsistence strategy. However, human trabecular bone structural variation is complex and future work should explore how other factors (diet, climate, genetics, disease load, etc.), in addition to activity, influence bone structural variation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".