Elsevier

Legal Medicine

Volume 12, Issue 1, January 2010, Pages 1-7
Legal Medicine

Review Article
Forensic age estimation in human skeletal remains: Current concepts and future directions

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2009.09.001Get rights and content

Abstract

Skeletal identification has a long tradition in both physical and forensic anthropology. The process generally begins with formulation of a biological profile (osteobiography); specifically, estimation of sex, age, ethnicity and stature. The present paper briefly reviews a selection of the principal methods used for one aspect of the identification process; the estimation of personal age. It is well-documented that variability in the morphological features used to assess age in the human skeleton progressively increases from birth to old age. Thus choice of method is inherently related to whether unidentified remains are those of a juvenile or an adult. This review, therefore, considers methods appropriate for age estimation in both juvenile and adult remains; the former being primarily based on developmental, and the latter degenerative, morphological features. Such a review is timely as new methods are constantly being developed, concurrent with refinements to those already well established in mainstream anthropology.

Introduction

Forensic anthropology is a discipline that is continually evolving and expanding. Not only does the role of the forensic anthropologist include the traditional study of human skeletal remains for the purpose of identification (e.g. building a biological profile, trauma analysis, facial reconstruction), but it now also frequently involves identifying the living (e.g. ascertaining whether a person has reached the age of criminal responsibility). The expansion of the discipline, combined with rapidly improving technology, has seen a real increase in the development of new, and refinement of existing, methods. The historical development, current state, and future direction of the discipline was recently comprehensively reviewed by Komar and Buikstra [1].

Forensic anthropologists generally apply their expertise to medicolegal investigations, from single homicide cases, through to mass death scenarios resulting from violent activities (e.g. 9/11 – [2]; Bali bombing – [3]; war crimes – [4]) and natural disasters (south Asian tsunami – [5]). When unknown remains are referred to the forensic investigator, one of the first stages of the identification process (after ascertaining that the remains are actually human and of forensic relevance) involves formulating the biological profile (osteobiography); sex, age, ethnicity and stature. With each of these factors a range of considerations ultimately determine choice of method and accuracy. The present paper briefly reviews a selection of the principal methods used for one aspect of the identification process, the estimation of personal age in human skeletal remains, and discusses some of the factors that underlie how an appropriate technique is selected.

Section snippets

Selecting an appropriate method

Age estimation depends in part on the skeletal elements available for analysis; different bones are inherently more resilient than other to damaging taphonomic processes, resulting in some bias in preservation [6], [7]. The nature of the death(s) being investigated also influences this process; e.g. a high velocity impact usually results in increased fragmentation [8]. Subsequent considerations are typically related to the actual method(s), which as outlined by Ritz-Timme et al. [9], should

Age estimation – juveniles

It is well-documented that age estimation is usually most accurate in individuals still growing. In mature individuals, most standards generally rely on the highly variable deterioration of morphological markers (e.g. pubic symphysis; sacro-iliac joint; sternal rib ends) that are more influenced by environmental factors, as opposed to the more predictable and well-documented developmental markers characteristic of the juvenile skeleton (e.g. dental development; skeletal growth and maturation)

Age estimation – adults

Age estimation in adults, in the absence of key developmental markers, depends on the more highly variable degeneration of bones. This is further complicated by the fact that individualistic factors (e.g. lifestyle, health and nutrition) can influence skeletal remodeling throughout life, introducing an extra source of bias into the final assessment. Different parts of the skeleton can thus ‘age’ at different rates, both between and within individuals. In their analysis of the Branch Davidian

So what does the future hold?

Anthropologists interested in the skeleton have traditionally relied on the direct examination of physical remains as a primary source of research data. As repositories of documented skeletons (both juvenile and adult) are becoming increasingly rare, and considering that many of the extant collections comprise individuals dating from historic periods, alternative data for modern populations must be found. Clinical images, such as radiographs, computed tomography scans and magnetic resonance

Official disclaimer

The author discloses no financial relationship with commercial entities.

References (124)

  • R.L. Lyman

    Vertebrate taphonomy

    (1994)
  • C.M. Stojanowski et al.

    Differential skeletal preservation at Windover Pond: causes and consequences

    Am J Phys Anthropol

    (2002)
  • R.W. Byard et al.

    Avulsion of the distal tibial shaft in aircraft crashes: a pathological feature of extreme decelerative injury

    Am J Forensic Med Pathol

    (2006)
  • S. Ritz-Timme et al.

    Age estimation: the state of the art in relation to the specific demands of forensic practice

    Int J Legal Med

    (2000)
  • G.A. Harrison et al.

    Human biology: an introduction to human evolution, variation, growth and ecology

    (1977)
  • L.T. Humphrey

    Growth patterns in the modern human skeleton

    Am J Phys Anthropol

    (1998)
  • L. Scheuer

    Brief communication: a blind test of mandibular morphology for sexing mandibles in the first few years of life

    Am J Phys Anthropol

    (2002)
  • D. Franklin et al.

    Sexual dimorphism in the subadult mandible: quantification using geometric morphometrics

    J Forensic Sci

    (2007)
  • H.F.V. Cardoso

    Environmental effects on skeletal versus dental development: using a documented subadult sample to test a basic assumption in human osteological research

    Am J Phys Anthropol

    (2007)
  • L. Konigsberg et al.

    Estimation of age at death from dental emergence and implications for studies of prehistoric somatic growth

  • E.F.P. Jellife et al.

    Deciduous dental eruption, nutrition and age assessment

    J Trop Ped Env Child Health

    (1973)
  • R.J. Sherwood et al.

    Fetal age: methods of estimation and effects of pathology

    Am J Phys Anthropol

    (2000)
  • J.E. Buikstra et al.

    Paleodemography: critiques and controversies

    Am Anthropol

    (1985)
  • D. Franklin et al.

    Mandibular morphology as an indicator of human subadult age: interlandmark approaches

    J Forensic Sci

    (2007)
  • L. Martrille et al.

    Comparison of four skeletal methods for the estimation of age at death on white and black adults

    J Forensic Sci

    (2007)
  • C.O. Lovejoy et al.

    Chronological metamorphosis of the auricular surface of the ilium: a new method for the determination of adult skeletal age at death

    Am J Phys Anthropol

    (1985)
  • S.R. Saunders et al.

    A test of several methods of skeletal age estimation using a documented archaeological sample

    Can Soc Forensic Sci J

    (1992)
  • M.E. Bedford et al.

    Test of the multifactorial aging method using skeletons with known ages-at-death from the grant collection

    Am J Phys Anthropol

    (1993)
  • S.I. Fairgrieve et al.

    On a test of the multifactorial aging method by Bedford et al. (1993)

    Am J Phys Anthropol

    (1995)
  • Y. Nagar et al.

    Interrelationships between various aging methods, and their relevance to palaeodemography

    Hum Evol

    (2004)
  • T.D. White et al.

    Human osteology

    (2000)
  • R. Samworth et al.

    Estimation of adult skeletal age-at-death: statistical assumptions and applications

    Int J Osteoarch

    (2007)
  • D. Wolfe-Steadman et al.

    Statistical basis for positive identification in forensic anthropology

    Am J Phys Anthropol

    (2006)
  • J.L. Boldsen et al.

    Transition analysis: a new method for estimating age from skeletons

  • L.W. Konigsberg et al.

    Estimation and evidence in forensic anthropology: age-at-death

    J Forensic Sci

    (2008)
  • D.H. Ubelaker

    Human skeletal remains: excavation, analysis, interpretation

    (1978)
  • L. Scheuer

    Application of osteology to forensic medicine

    Clin Anat

    (2002)
  • L. Klepinger

    Fundamentals of forensic anthropology

    (2006)
  • I.M. Sopher

    Forensic dentistry

    (1976)
  • C.F.A. Moorrees et al.

    Age variation of formation stages for ten permanent teeth

    J Dent Res

    (1963)
  • C.F.A. Moorrees et al.

    Formation and resorption of three deciduous teeth in children

    Am J Phys Anthropol

    (1963)
  • A. Demirjian et al.

    A new system of dental age assessment

    Hum Biol

    (1973)
  • B.H. Smith

    Standards of human tooth formation and dental age assessment

  • H.M. Liversidge

    Accuracy of age estimation from developing teeth of a population of known age (0–5.4 years)

    Int J Osteoarch

    (1994)
  • P.J. Davis et al.

    The accuracy and precision of the “Demirjian System” when used for age determination in Chinese children

    Swed Dent J

    (1994)
  • R. Nykanen et al.

    Validity of the method for dental age estimation when applied to Norwegian children

    Act Odontol Scan

    (1998)
  • H.M. Liversidge et al.

    Dental maturation in British children: are Demirjian’s standards applicable?

    Int J Paediatr Dent

    (1999)
  • G. Willems et al.

    Dental age estimation in Belgian children: Demirjian’s technique revisited

    J Forensic Sci

    (2001)
  • N. Chaillet et al.

    Comparison of dental maturity in children of different ethnic origins: international maturity curves for clinicians

    J Forensic Sci

    (2005)
  • D.H. Ubelaker

    Human skeletal remains: excavation, analysis, interpretation

    (1999)
  • Cited by (225)

    • Age estimation from mandibles in Malay: A 2D geometric morphometric analysis

      2023, Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text