Ilium morphological variation during growth in forager populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human pelvic morphology has often been described in terms of an evolutionary compromise between bipedalism, encephalization, and obstetrics; however, recent research has argued that the pelvis is more biologically plastic than previously thought. Variation in pelvic form exists among adult modern human populations, but the factors influencing this variation, and when it manifests during growth, remain to be understood. The aim of this study is to investigate patterns of growth and development of the ilium and to consider factors that may influence variation. The presence of variation in lower limb strength emerging during growth between populations with differing foraging strategies prompted an investigation into whether the same variation extends to the pelvis. Ilium morphology was examined using a geometric morphometrics approach in an ontogenetic sample of bony ilia from four forager populations, two of whom pursued terrestrial foraging strategies (Later Stone Age southern Africa, Indian Knoll) and two of whom pursued marine foraging strategies (Point Hope, Sadlermiut) (n = 161). Principal component analysis shows population-based patterning in ilium morphology from birth which may reflect a combination of climatic adaptation, body shape differences, and neutral evolutionary processes. Ontogenetic allometry also appears to be a driver of morphological variation in the ilium during growth. These results have implications for the study of ilium shape differences among fossil hominin ilia and demonstrate that global patterning in ilium morphology is present even in the youngest members of a population.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".