The effect of diet and sociopolitical change on physiological stress and behavior in late<scp>Roman‐Early</scp>Byzantine (300–700<scp>AD</scp>) and Islamic (902–1,235<scp>AD</scp>) populations from Ibiza, Spain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives This study evaluated chronological changes in physiological stress and levels of habitual loading of Ibizan populations from the Late Roman–Early Byzantine (LREB) to the Islamic period (300–1,235 AD) using measures of body size and bone cross‐sectional properties to compare Urban LREB, Urban Medieval Islamic, and Rural Medieval Islamic groups. It also explored the effect of diet, modeled using stable isotopes, on physiological stress levels and behavior. Materials and methods The sample comprised individuals from three archeological populations: Urban Late Roman‐ Early Byzantine (LREB) (300–700 AD), Medieval Urban Islamic (902–1,235 AD), and Medieval Rural Islamic. Bone lengths, femoral head dimensions, and cross‐sectional properties, diaphyseal products and circumferences, were compared to assess differences in body size and habitual loading in 222 adult individuals. Ordinary least squares regression evaluated the correlations between these measures and carbon (δ13C) and nitrogen (δ15N) stable isotope ratios in 115 individuals for whom both isotope values and osteological measures are available. Results The Medieval Rural Islamic group had shorter stature and reduced lower limb cross‐sectional properties compared to the two urban groups. Limb shape differs between Urban LREB and Urban Medieval Islamic groups. Measures of body size length were positively correlated with δ13C values in all individuals and separately in the Urban LREB and Rural Medieval Islamic groups. δ15N showed a positive correlation with left humerus shape in the Urban LREB sample. Conclusions The low stature and cross‐sectional properties of the Medieval Rural Islamic group may be an indicator of greater physiological stress, potentially due to poorer diet. Positive correlations between measures of body size and δ13C values further suggest that greater access to C4resources improved diet quality. Alternatively, this relationship could indicate greater body size among migrants from areas where individuals consumed more C4resources.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".