The importance of the bony pelvis to biological anthropology is undeniable. In modern humans, fossil hominins, and non-human primates, pelvic morphology has been the basis for discussing adaptations for locomotion and obstetrics. However, it can be easy to forget that pelvic variation is more complex than what can be explained by sex differences and locomotor adaptations.
In humans, the bony pelvis changes throughout an individual’s lifetime. It continues to develop based on genetic and hormonal signaling, and responds to changes in weight, activity level, and pathologies. These changes create a wide array of variation that likely also exists in our contemporary hominoid relatives and in our hominin ancestors. Causes of variation in the bony pelvis have implications for predicting risk factors in clinical settings, identifying the deceased in forensics settings, estimating sex and age distributions in bioarcheological settings, understanding pelvic evolution in paleoanthropological settings, and interpreting the significance of non-human primate pelvic anatomy.
Here we bring together researchers from different sub-disciplines who explore factors that affect human pelvis morphology, including hand preference, thermoregulation, gut size, growth and development. We further include researchers who use other extant species as models, be they monkey or mice, to better understand human variation. Finally, we have researchers who focus on pelvic morphology in fossil hominins, seeking to understand how variation affects our ability to reconstruct pelvis shape and the evolution of potential obstetric constraints. This session will investigate the impact pelvic variation, broadly defined, has on long-held interpretations of pelvic morphology and discuss how to better encompass the range of variation seen in nature in our theoretical models as we move forward with pelvic research.
|Discussant: Helen Kurki|
|1||The effect of hand preference on human pelvic shape asymmetry. Amandine Eriksen, Noreen von Cramon-Taubadel.|
|2||Exploring the effect of body mass on pelvic features that vary by sex. Caroline VanSickle, Logan Jepsen, Kaycee Johnson.|
|3||The correlation between bi-iliac breadth and birth canal size in humans: implications for the obstetric dilemma. Jennifer Eyre.|
|4||The pelvis relates to gut size differently in male and female humans. Jeanelle Q. Uy, John Hawks, Caroline VanSickle.|
|5||Sacral slope and greater sciatic notch shape variation in the developing human pelvis. Sarah M. Zaleski.|
|6||An examination of pelvic and overall body growth velocity in growing girls from the United Kingdom. Sarah-Louise Decrausaz, Jane E. Williams, Mary S. Fewtrell, Jay T. Stock, Jonathan C. Wells.|
|7||The ontogeny of pelvic sexual dimorphism in Macaca mulatta. Elizabeth A. Moffett.|
|8||Variation in the anthropoid primate pelvis does not reflect differences in diet. Eve K. Boyle, Sergio Almécija.|
|9||Genetic and Epigenetic Insights into Human Girdle Evolution Using the Mouse Model. Mariel Young, Lyena Birkenstock, Terence D. Capellini.|
|10||A re-evaluation of fossil hominin obstetric constraints. Natalie M. Laudicina, Matt Cartmill.|
|11||Geometric morphometric analysis of the adult modern human pubic symphysis and implications for fossil reconstruction. Mayowa T. Adegboyega, Timothy D. Weaver.|
|12||Comparative anatomy and 3D geometric morphometrics of the SD-1663 hipbone from the El Sidrón Neandertal site (Asturias, Spain). Nicole Torres-Tamayo, Markus Bastir, Daniel García-Martínez, Caroline VanSickle, Antonio García-Tabernero, Antonio Rosas.|