The affinity of the Harris lines to bone massiveness
Agnieszka Tomaszewska , Daniel Psonak
AbstractThe objective of the study was to investigate whether the occurrence of the Harris lines (HLs) affects the bone massiveness and intravital body height of the individuals. Depending on the nature of the Harris lines, catch up growth processes, bone remodelling or purely a nutritional stress response, may be the causing factor. Methods: The skeletal material of 404 individuals was investigated (male N = 141/ female N = 133). HLs were recorded on roentgenographs in two bone extremities. Results: Although HLs appeared more frequently in male tibiae, the difference was not statistically significant. The distal ends of tibiae were characterized by significantly higher occurrence of HLs than the proximal ends. The percentage of HLs-containing tibiae decreased with an individual’s age. Both frequency and intensity were independent of sex and they reached higher values in left tibiae. HLs frequency was higher in the distal ends of the tibiae. HLs-containing left and right female tibiae were significantly shorter. Moreover HLs-containing right female tibiae possessed significantly thinner distal ends. Intravital body height of female skeletons without HLs was significantly higher. When controlled, the massiveness ratios, despite its slightly higher values in tibiae with HLs, were not significant. Conclusions: Weak differences in massiveness ratios suggest, that the observed differences in the number of HLs were caused by factors other than different bone remodelling at the right and left side of a skeleton. The observations suggest also that the factors promoting HLs formation affected men and women in the dissimilar way or, at least, the effects of compensation of temporarily arrested bone growth were different in the two sexes.
|Journal series||Anthropologischer Anzeiger, ISSN 0003-5548, (N/A 70 pkt)|
|Keywords in English||Harris lines, massiveness index, biological condition, tibiae X-rays|
|ASJC Classification||; ; ;|
|Not used for evaluation||yes|
|Publication indicators||: 2018 = 0.407; : 2019 = 0.679 (2) - 2019=0.709 (5)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.