(Cyprus) and Xenia-Paula Kyriakou for providing access to the Cypriot Collection. Stout & Paine. (1992). Stout et al. (1994). Cho et al. (2002). Goliath et al. (2016).
Histological Age Estimation on Two Mediterranean Populations: A Validation Study of Four Existing Methodologies J.G. GARCÍA-DONAS1A, A.R. SCHOLL2B, A. DALTON1, R.R. PAINE3, E.F. KRANIOTI1 1A,Edinburgh Unit for Forensic Anthropology, School of History, Classics and Archaeology, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK 2BSchool of Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia 3Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas 100
Stout and Paine 1992 Stout et al. 1994 Cho et al. 2002 (Known Ethnicity) Cho et al. 2002 (Unknown Ethnicity) Goliath et al. 2016
INTRODUCTION 90
Estimated Age (years)
Age estimation is one of the first steps in the identification process and the choice of the method is crucial for ensuring accurate results1. The fragmented nature of human remains makes histological methods one of the few tools available for estimating age at death in forensic contexts2, and thus, validation studies on existing histomorphometric techniques are highly recommended. This project aims to test four histological aging methods3-6 developed from different reference populations on two Mediterranean samples in order to assess the reliability and accuracy of the techniques.
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10 10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Real Age (years) Figure 1. Estimated Age versus Real Age for each estimation method.
MATERIALS AND METHODS Standard ribs from two cemetery collections were collected (N=15 Cretans; N=15 Greek-Cypriots). The age range for the total sample is 19-93 years old (Mean Age= 61.37 years, SD=17.89) and both sexes are equally distributed. Specimens with known or obvious pathologies were excluded. Intra-observer was examined7. All variables were tested for correlation with age and sex calculating Pearson’s twotailed correlation coefficients. Variables were entered in each equation from the four published studies3-6 and age, absolute standard errors and absolute standard percentage errors were estimated.
RESULTS Intra-observer error reached the accepted level of agreement. All variables exhibited significant correlation with age (p 60 years age cohort in comparison with the other three methods applied (Table 1).
Table 1. Absolute mean error rates and absolute percentage error rates; mean age and standard deviation produced by the four methods. Stout & Paine (1992)
All
< 60 y.o.
> 60 y.o.
Stout et al. (1994)
Cho et al. (2002) EuropeanAmerican
Unknown ethnicity
Rib Microphotograph (100x)
CONCLUSIONS
Goliath et al. (2016)
Mean
38.5
60.1%
25.1
39.5%
23.3
37.8%
24.2
38.6%
10.4
24.2%
SD
15.1
12.5%
13.2
14.9%
10.4
14.5%
10.5
10.8%
8.9
39.4%
Mean
26.5
53.7%
18.3
37.2%
19.4
40.5%
18.3
38%
13.1
39.7%
SD
10.2
15.1%
8.1
13.4%
9.3
17.4%
7.6
12.2%
10.2
53.9%
Mean
49.1
65.6%
31.1
41.5%
26.7
35.5%
29.4
39.1%
8.1
10.7%
SD
9.9
5.9%
14.2
16.2%
10.4
11.4%
10
9.9%
7.1
8.5%
Mean Age
22.82
36.48
38.14
37.4
65.42
SD
4.46
12.81
14.01
11.29
12.23
Forensic methods must be disseminated in order to ensure accurate results. Our results showed differences in accuracy rates for estimating age-at-death on the Mediterranean samples (Fig. 1). The best performance was achieved by the Goliath et al. (2016)6 method yielding an accuracy of ± 5 years for 43% of the sample. This suggests osteon circularity may be used as a valuable age indicator for old specimens. Moreover, inter-population variation in bone remodeling dynamics may affect the techniques’ performance and populationspecific standards may be recommended8. Although a larger sample is needed to verify these preliminary results, it is proven than validation studies are required in view of choosing the most adequate method, especially in forensic cases. Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Despoina Nathena and Manolis Michalodimitrakis for providing access to the Cretan Collection and to the Orthodox Church of Limassol (Cyprus) and Xenia-Paula Kyriakou for providing access to the Cypriot Collection.
References 1. Merrit C. Testing the accuracy of adult skeletal age estimation methods: original methods versus revised and newer methods. 5. Cho H, Stout SD, Madsen RW, Streeter MA. Population-specific histological age-estimating method: a model for known AfricanExp. Anthropol. 2013;12: 102-119. American and European American skeletal remains. J. Forensic Sci. 2002;47: 12-18. 2. Crowder C. Estimation of Age at Death Using Cortical Bone Histomorphometry, Technical Report published by U.S. Department 6. Goliath JR, Stewart MC, Stout SM. Variation in Osteon Histomorphometrics and Their Impact on Age-at-Death Estimation in of Justice; 2013. 2010-DN-BX-K035. Older Individuals. Forensic Sci. Int. 2016;262: 282.e1–282.e6. 3. Stout SD & Paine RR. Brief communication: histological age estimation using rib and clavicle. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 1992;87: 7. Ulijaszek SJ, Kerr DA. Anthropometric measurement error and the assessment of nutritional status. Br. J. Nutr. 1999;82: 165-77. 111-115. 8. Watanabe Y, Konishi M, Shimada M, Ohara H, Iwamoto S. Estimation of age from the femur of Japanese cadavers. Forensic Sci. 4. Stout SD, Dietz WH, Işcan MY, Loth SR. Estimation of age at death using cortical histomorphometry of the sternal Int. 1998;98: 55-65. end of the fourth rib. J. Forensic Sci. 1994;39: 778-784.
