Ancestry Estimation: Advances and Limitations in Forensic Applications

References

• Işcan M, Steyn M. The Human Skeleton in Forensic Medicine. 3rd ed. Springfield, Illinois: CHARLES C THOMAS; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• de Boer HH, Obertová Z, Cunha E, et al. Strengthening the role of forensic anthropology in personal identification: position statement by the Board of the Forensic Anthropology Society of Europe (FASE). Forensic Sci Int. 2020;315:1–7. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110456
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cunha E. Pathology as a factor of personal identity in forensic anthropology. Forensic Anthropol Med Complement Sci. 2006;333–358. doi:10.1007/978-1-59745-099-7_14
   Google Scholar
• Rissech C. New trends in forensic anthorpology, the importance of human anatomy in forensic anthropology. EJA. 2021;25(S2).
   Google Scholar
• Cunha E, Ubelaker DH. Evaluation of ancestry from human skeletal remains: a concise review. Forensic Sci Res. 2020;5(2):89–97. doi:10.1080/20961790.2019.1697060
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plens CR, De Souza CD, Albanese J, Capp TTL, Saavedra de Paiva LA. Reflections on methods to estimate race and ancestry on reference osteological samples in the Brazilian context. Ethics Med Public Heal. 2021;18. doi:10.1016/j.jemep.2021.100680
   Google Scholar
• DiGangi EA, Bethard JD. Uncloaking a lost cause: decolonizing ancestry estimation in the United States. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2021;175(2):422–436. doi:10.1002/ajpa.24212
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sierp I, Henneberg M. Can ancestry be consistently determined from the skeleton? Anthropol Rev. 2015;78(1):21–31. doi:10.1515/anre-2015-0002
   Google Scholar
• Sauer NJ. Forensic anthropology and the concept of race: if races don’t exist, why are forensic anthropologists so good at identifying them? Soc Sci Med. 1992;34(2):107–111. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(92)90086-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serre D, Pääbo S, Paabo S. Evidence for gradients of human genetic diversity. Genome Res. 2004;1679–1685. DOI:10.1101/gr.2529604.any
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDowell JL, L’Abbé EN, Kenyhercz MW. Nasal aperture shape evaluation between black and white South Africans. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;222(1–3):397.e1–397.e6. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2012.06.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jablonski NG. Skin color and race. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2021;175(2):437–447. doi:10.1002/ajpa.24200
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller-Wille S. Race and history: comments from an epistemological point of view. Sci Technol Hum Values. 2014;39(4):597–606. doi:10.1177/0162243913517759
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darwin C. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray; 1859:1859.
   Google Scholar
• DiGangi EA, Hefner JT. Chapter 5 - ancestry estimation. In: DiGangi EA, Moore RM, editors. Research Methods in Human Skeletal Biology. Academic Press; 2013:117–149.
   Google Scholar
• Templeton AR. Biological races in humans. Stud Hist Philos Sci Part C. 2013;44(3):262–271. doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2013.04.010
   Google Scholar
• Maass P, Friedling LJ. Morphometric analysis of the humerus in an adult South African cadaveric sample. Forensic Sci Int. 2018;289:451.e1–451.e9. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.04.037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDowell JL, Kenyhercz MW, L’Abbé EN. An evaluation of nasal bone and aperture shape among three South African populations. Forensic Sci Int. 2015;252:189.e1–189.e7. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.04.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg NA, Pritchard JK, Weber JL, et al. Genetic structure of human populations. Science. 2002;298(5602):2381–2385. doi:10.1126/science.1078311
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross A, Williams S. Ancestry studies in forensic anthropology: back on the frontier of racism. Biology. 2021;10(7):1–12. doi:10.3390/biology10070602
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross A, Pilloud M. The need to incorporate human variation and evolutionary theory in forensic anthropology: a call for reform. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2021;1–12. doi:10.1002/ajpa.24384
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier C, Craig A, Adams DM. Language use in ancestry research and estimation. J Forensic Sci. 2021;66(1):11–24. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.14601
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bethard JD, DiGangi EA. Letter to the editor—moving beyond a lost cause: forensic anthropology and ancestry estimates in the United States. J Forensic Sci. 2020;65(5):1791–1792. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.14513
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stull KE, Bartelink EJ, Klales AR, et al. Commentary on: Bethard JD, DiGangi EA. Letter to the editor—moving beyond a lost cause: forensic anthropology and ancestry estimates in the United States. J Forensic Sci. 2020;65(5):1791–1792. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.14513
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ousley S, Jantz R, Freid D. Understanding race and human variation: why forensic anthropologists are good at identifying race. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2009;139(1):68–76. doi:10.1002/ajpa.21006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hefner JT, Ousley SD. Statistical classification methods for estimating ancestry using morphoscopic traits. J Forensic Sci. 2014;59(4):883–890. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.12421
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katherine Spradley M, Jantz RL. Ancestry estimation in forensic anthropology: geometric morphometric versus standard and nonstandard interlandmark distances. J Forensic Sci. 2016;61(4):892–897. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13081
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padhukasahasram B. Inferring ancestry from population genomic data and its applications. Front Genet. 2014;5:204. doi:10.3389/fgene.2014.00204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang C, Zhan X, Bragg-Gresham J, et al. Ancestry estimation and control of population stratification for sequence-based association studies. Nat Genet. 2014;46(4):409–415. doi:10.1038/ng.2924
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ambers A, Elwick K, Cropper ER, et al. Mitochondrial DNA analysis of the putative skeletal remains of Sieur de Marle: genetic support for anthropological assessment of biogeographic ancestry. Forensic Sci Int. 2021;320:110682. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2021.110682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gutiérrez DC, DiGangi EA, Bethard JD. Applicability of stable isotope analysis to the Colombian human identification crisis. Forensic Sci Humanit Action. 2020;411–424. doi:10.1002/9781119482062.ch26
   Google Scholar
• Algee-Hewitt B, Coelho C, Navega D, Cunha E. Chapter 4.5 - Statistical approaches to ancestry estimation: new and established methods for the quantification of cranial variation for forensic casework. In: Obertová Z, Stewart A, Cattaneo S, editors. Statistics and Probability in Forensic Anthropolog. Academic Press; 2020:227–247.
   Google Scholar
• Hiernaux J. Bantu expansion: the evidence from physical anthropology confronted with linguistic and archaeological evidence. J Afr Hist. 1968;9(4):505–515. doi:10.1017/S0021853700009014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birkby WH. An estimation of race and sex identification from the cranial measurements. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1966;42:21–27. doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330240103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giles E, Elliot O. Race identification from cranial measurements. 1962.
   Google Scholar
• Howells WW. Cranial Variation in Man; a Study by Multivariate Analysis of Patterns of Difference Among Recent Human Populations. Cambridge, Mass.: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University; 1973.
   Google Scholar
• Gill R, Stanley GW. Skeletal Attribution of Race. Albuquerque, N.M.: Maxwell Museum of Anthropology; 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Ross AH, Ubelaker DH, Kimmerle EH. Implications of dimorphism, population variation, and secular change in estimating population affinity in the Iberian Peninsula. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;206(1–3):214.e1–214.e5. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stull KE, Kenyhercz MW, L’Abbé EN. Ancestry estimation in South Africa using craniometrics and geometric morphometrics. Forensic Sci Int. 2014;245:206.e1–206.e7. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.10.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kranioti EF, García-Donas JG, Can IO, Ekizoglu O. Ancestry estimation of three Mediterranean populations based on cranial metrics. Forensic Sci Int. 2018;286:265.e1–265.e8. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.02.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liebenberg L, Krüger GC, L’Abbé EN, Stull KE. Postcraniometric sex and ancestry estimation in South Africa: a validation study. Int J Legal Med. 2019;133(1):289–296. doi:10.1007/s00414-018-1865-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katzmarzyk PT, Leonard WR. Climatic influences on human body size and proportions: ecological adaptations and secular trends. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1998;106(4):483–503. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1096-8644(199808)106:4<483::AID-AJPA4>3.0.CO;2-K
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meeusen RA, Christensen AM, Hefner JT. The use of femoral neck axis length to estimate sex and ancestry. J Forensic Sci. 2015;60(5):1300–1304. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.12820
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wescott D, Srikanta D. Testing assumptions of the Gilbert and Gill method for assessing ancestry using the femur subtrochanteric shape. Homo. 2008;59(5):347–363. doi:10.1016/j.jchb.2008.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spradley MK, Jantz RL, Robinson A, Peccerelli F. Demographic change and forensic identification: problems in metric identification of Hispanic skeletons. J Forensic Sci. 2008;53(1):21–28. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2007.00614.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spradley MK. Metric ancestry estimation from the postcranial skeleton. In: Biological Affinity in Forensic Identification of Human Skeletal Remains: BeyondBlack and White. CRC Press, LLC; 2014:83–94.
   Google Scholar
• Kranioti EF, Garcia-Donas JG, Karell MA, et al. Metric variation of the tibia in the Mediterranean: implications in forensic identification. Forensic Sci Int. 2019;299:223–228. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.03.044
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Small C, Brits DM, Hemingway J. Quantification of the subpubic angle in South Africans. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;222(1–3):395.e1–395.e6. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2012.06.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ünlütürk Ö. Metric assessment of ancestry from the vertebrae in South Africans. Int J Legal Med. 2017;131(4):1123–1131. doi:10.1007/s00414-016-1483-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bidmos MA, Dayal MR, Adegboye OA. Measurements of the talus in the assessment of population affinity. Forensic Sci Int. 2018;287:221.e1–221.e7. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.03.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ousley S, Jantz R, Hollinger RE. FORDISC 3.0: computerized forensic discriminant functions. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2005;Suppl 41:2–32. doi:10.1002/ajpa.20354
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright R. Guide to using the CRANID6 programs CR6aIND: for linear and nearest neighbours discriminant analysis. 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Howells WW. Howells’ craniometric data on the Internet. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1996;101(3):441–442. doi:10.1002/ajpa.1331010302
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elliott M, Collard M. FORDISC and the determination of ancestry from cranial measurements. Biol Lett. 2009;5:849–852. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.0462
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kallenberger L, Pilbrow V. Using CRANID to test the population affinity of known crania. J Anat. 2012;221(5):459–464. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7580.2012.01558.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urbanová P, Ross AH, Jurda M, Nogueira M. Testing the reliability of software tools in sex and ancestry estimation in a multi-ancestral Brazilian sample. Legal Med. 2014;16:264–273. doi:10.1016/j.legalmed.2014.06.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes CE, Dudzik B, Algee-Hewitt BFB, Jones A, Anderson BE. Understanding (Mis)classification trends of Latin Americans in fordisc 3.1: incorporating cranial morphology, microgeographic origin, and admixture proportions for interpretation. J Forensic Sci. 2019;64(2):353–366. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13893
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas RM, Parks CL, Richard AH. Accuracy rates of ancestry estimation by forensic anthropologists using identified forensic cases. J Forensic Sci. 2017;62(4):971–974. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13361
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg GE, Kenyhercz MW. Introducing human mandible identification [(hu)MANid]: a free, web-based GUI to classify human mandibles. J Forensic Sci. 2017;62(6):1592–1598. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13479
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenyhercz MW, Berg GE. Evaluating Mixture Discriminant Analysis to Classify Human Mandibles with (Hu)manid, a Free, r-Based GUI. Elsevier Inc.; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Hefner JT. Cranial nonmetric variation and estimating ancestry. J Forensic Sci. 2009;54(5):985–995. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01118.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albanese J, Saunders SR. Is it possible to escape racial typology in forensic identification? Forensic Anthropol Med Complement Sci. 2006;281–316. doi:10.1007/978-1-59745-099-7_12
   Google Scholar
• L’Abbé EN, Van Rooyen C, Nawrocki SP, Becker PJ. An evaluation of non-metric cranial traits used to estimate ancestry in a South African sample. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;209(1–3):195.e1–195.e7. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birkby WH, Fenton TW, Anderson BE. Identifying Southwest Hispanics using nonmetric traits and the cultural profile. J Forensic Sci. 2008;53(1):29–33. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2007.00611.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hefner JT, Pilloud MA, Black CJ, Anderson BE. Morphoscopic trait expression in Hispanic populations. J Forensic Sci. 2015;60(5):1135–1139. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.12826
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plemons A, Hefner JT. Ancestry estimation using macromorphoscopic traits. Acad Forensic Pathol. 2016;6(3):400–412. doi:10.23907/2016.041
   Google Scholar
• Hefner J. The statistical determination of ancestry using cranial nonmetric traits. Anthropology. 2007;2007:126.
   Google Scholar
• Spiros MC, Hefner JT. Ancestry estimation using cranial and postcranial macromorphoscopic traits. J Forensic Sci. 2020;65(3):921–929. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.14231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brace CL, Hunt KD. A nonracial craniofacial perspective on human variation: A(ustralia) to Z(uni). Am J Phys Anthropol. 1990;82(3):341–360. doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330820310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marado LM, Silva AM. Estimation of ancestry for an undocumented mandibular sample using dental morphology. Anthropol Anzeiger. 2017;74(3):229–239. doi:10.1127/anthranz/2017/0690
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edgar HJH. Testing the utility of dental morphological traits commonly used in the forensic identification of ancestry. Front Oral Biol. 2009;13:49–54. doi:10.1159/000242390
   Google Scholar
• Kenyhercz MW, Klales AR, Kenyhercz WE. Molar size and shape in the estimation of biological ancestry: a comparison of relative cusp location using geometric morphometrics and interlandmark distances. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2014;153(2):269–279. doi:10.1002/ajpa.22429
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubbard AR, Guatelli-Steinberg D, Irish JD. Do nuclear DNA and dental nonmetric data produce similar reconstructions of regional population history? An example from modern coastal Kenya. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2015;157(2):295–304. doi:10.1002/ajpa.22714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen AM, Passalacqua NV, Bartelink EJ. Ancestry estimation. Forensic Anthropol. 2014;223–242. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-418671-2.00009-4
   Google Scholar
• Scott G, Pilloud M, Navega D, d’Oliveira J, Cunha E, Irish JD. rASUDAS: a new web-based application for estimating ancestry from tooth morphology. Forensic Anthropol. 2018;1:18–31. doi:10.5744/fa.2018.0003
   Google Scholar
• Nikita E, Nikitas P. On the use of machine learning algorithms in forensic anthropology. Leg Med. 2020;47:101771. doi:10.1016/j.legalmed.2020.101771
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deo RC. Machine learning in medicine. Circulation. 2015;132(20):1920–1930. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.001593
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldesman MR. Classification trees as an alternative to linear discriminant analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2002;119(3):257–275. doi:10.1002/ajpa.10102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bookstein FL. Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data: Geometry and Biology. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Adams DC, Rohlf FJ, Slice DE. A field comes of age: geometric morphometrics in the 21st century. Hystrix. 2013;24(1). doi:10.4404/hystrix-24.1-6283
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin D, Freedman L, Milne N, Oxnard CE. Geometric morphometric study of population variation in indigenous Southern African crania. Am J Hum Biol. 2007;19(1):20–33. doi:10.1002/ajhb.20569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretorius E, Steyn M, Scholtz Y. Investigation into the usability of geometric morphometric analysis in assessment of sexual dimorphism. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2006;129(1):64–70. doi:10.1002/ajpa.20251
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitteroecker P, Gunz P, Windhager S, Schaefer K. A brief review of shape, form, and allometry in geometric morphometrics, with applications to human facial morphology. Hystrix. 2013;24(1):1–8. doi:10.4404/hystrix-24.1-6369
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slice DE. Geometric morphometrics. Annu Rev Anthropol. 2007;36:261–281. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120613
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slice DE, Ross A, Neubauer S. 3D-ID: geometric morphometric classification of crania for forensic scientists. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:2124–2129. doi:10.1073/pnas.0808730106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin D, O’Higgins P, Oxnard CE, Dadour I. Sexual dimorphism and population variation in the adult mandible: forensic applications of geometric morphometrics. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2007;3(1):15–22. doi:10.1385/ForensicSci.Med.Pathol.:3:1:15
   Google Scholar
• Decker S. “Metricizing” non-metric craniofacial traits: application of three dimensional geometric morphometric analysis to ancestral identification. 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Schlager S, Rüdell A. Analysis of the human osseous nasal shape - population differences and sexual dimorphism. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2015;157(4):571–581. doi:10.1002/ajpa.22749
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lois Zlolniski S, Torres-Tamayo N, García-Martínez D, et al. 3D geometric morphometric analysis of variation in the human lumbar spine. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2019;170(3):361–372. doi:10.1002/ajpa.23918
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torres-Tamayo N, Martelli S, Schlager S, et al. Assessing thoraco-pelvic covariation in Homo sapiens and Pan troglodytes: a 3D geometric morphometric approach. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2020;173(3):514–534. doi:10.1002/ajpa.24103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Musilová B, Dupej J, Brůžek J, Bejdová Š, Velemínská J. Sex and ancestry related differences between two Central European populations determined using exocranial meshes. Forensic Sci Int. 2019;297:364–369. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.02.034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Schepartz LA. Three-dimensional geometric morphometric studies of modern human occipital variation. PLoS One. 2021;16(1):1–12. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0245445
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daboul A, Ivanovska T, Bülow R, Biffar R, Cardini A. Procrustes-based geometric morphometrics on MRI images: an example of inter-operator bias in 3D landmarks and its impact on big datasets. PLoS One. 2018;13(5):1–20. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0197675
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sholts SB, Walker PL, Kuzminsky SC, Miller KWP, Wärmländer SK. Identification of group affinity from cross-sectional contours of the human midfacial skeleton using digital morphometrics and 3D laser scanning technology. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(2):333. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01701.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García-Martínez D, Nalla S, Ferreira MT, Guichón RA, D’Angelo Del Campo MD, Bastir M. Eco-geographic adaptations in the human ribcage throughout a 3D geometric morphometric approach. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2018;166(2):323–336. doi:10.1002/ajpa.23433
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin D, Cardini A, Oxnard CE. A geometric morphometric approach to the quantification of population variation in sub-saharan African crania. Am J Hum Biol. 2010;22(1):23–35. doi:10.1002/ajhb.20908
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tawha T, Dinkele E, Mole C, Gibbon VE. Assessing zygomatic shape and size for estimating sex and ancestry in a South African sample. Sci Justice. 2020;60(3):284–292. doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2020.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yong R, Ranjitkar S, Lekkas D, et al. Three-dimensional (3D) geometric morphometric analysis of human premolars to assess sexual dimorphism and biological ancestry in Australian populations. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2018;166(2):373–385. doi:10.1002/ajpa.23438
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buck T, Viðarsdóttir U, Proposed A. Method for the identification of race in SubAdult skeletons: a geometric morphometric analysis of mandibular morphology. J Forensic Sci. 2004;49:1159–1164. doi:10.1520/JFS2004074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubin KM, DeLeon VB. Ancestral variation in orbital rim shape: a three-dimensional pilot study. J Forensic Sci. 2017;62(6):1575–1581. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xing S, Gibbon V, Clarke R, Liu W. Geometric morphometric analyses of orbit shape in Asian, African, and European human populations. Anthropol Sci. 2013;121(1):1–11. doi:10.1537/ase.120803
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross AH, Ubelaker DH. Complex nature of hominin dispersals: ecogeographical and climatic evidence for pre-contact craniofacial variation. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):11743. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-48205-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy RE, Garvin HM. A morphometric outline analysis of ancestry and sex differences in cranial shape. J Forensic Sci. 2018;63(4):1001–1009. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13699
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maass P, Friedling LJ. Morphometric analysis of the neurocranium in an adult South African cadaveric sample. J Forensic Sci. 2019;64(2):367–374. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13878
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark MA, Guatelli-Steinberg D, Hubbe M, Stout S. Quantification of maxillary dental arcade curvature and the estimation of biological ancestry in forensic anthropology. J Forensic Sci. 2016;61(1):141–146. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.12910
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maass P, Friedling LJ. Assessment of sex and ancestry variation of the morphology of the fibula. Anthropol Anzeiger. 2020;77(4):345–354. doi:10.1127/anthranz/2020/1164
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kranioti EF, Bastir M, Sánchez-Meseguer A, Rosas A. A geometric-morphometric study of the Cretan humerus for sex identification. Forensic Sci Int. 2009;189(1–3):111.e1–111.e8. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.04.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rusk KM, Ousley SD. An evaluation of sex- and ancestry-specific variation in sacral size and shape using geometric morphometrics. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2016;159(4):646–654. doi:10.1002/ajpa.22926
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steyn M, Pretorius E, Hutten L. Geometric morphometric analysis of the greater sciatic notch in South Africans. HOMO. 2004;54(3):197–206. doi:10.1078/0018-442X-00076
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hefner JT, Spradley MK, Anderson B. Ancestry assessment using random forest modeling. J Forensic Sci. 2014;59(3):583–589. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.12402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu Y, Chen PHC, Krause J, Peng L. How to read articles that use machine learning: users’ guides to the medical literature. JAMA. 2019;322(18):1806–1816. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.16489
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Navega D, Coelho C, Vicente R, Ferreira MT, Wasterlain S, Cunha E. AncesTrees: ancestry estimation with randomized decision trees. Int J Legal Med. 2015;129(5):1145–1153. doi:10.1007/s00414-014-1050-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier CA, Zhang K, Manhein MH, Li X. Palate shape and depth: a shape-matching and machine learning method for estimating ancestry from human skeletal remains. J Forensic Sci. 2015;60(5):1129–1134. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.12812
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Navega D, Vicente R, Vieira DN, Ross AH, Cunha E. AncesTrees: ancestry estimation with randomized decision trees. Int J Leg Med. 2015;129(3):651. doi:10.1007/s00414-014-1070-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross AH, Williams SE. Ancestry studies in forensic anthropology: back on the frontier of racism. Biology. 2021;10(7):1–12. doi:10.3390/biology10070602
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross AH. Regional isolation in the Balkan region: an analysis of craniofacial variation. Am Assoc Phys Anthropol. 2004;80(2003):73–80. doi:10.1002/ajpa.10339
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smay D, Armelagos G. Galileo wept: a critical assessment of the use of race in forensic anthropology. Transform Anthropol. 2000;9(2):19–29. doi:10.1525/tran.2000.9.2.19
   Google Scholar
• Edgar HJH, Hunley KL. Race reconciled?: how biological anthropologists view human variation. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2009;139(1):1–4. doi:10.1002/ajpa.20995
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slice DE, Ross A. 3D-ID: geometric morphometric classification of crania for forensic scientists. 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Saini V, Srivastava R, Rai RK, Shamal SN, Singh TB, Tripathi SK. An osteometric study of Northern Indian populations for sexual dimorphism in craniofacial region. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(3):700–705. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01707.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikita E, García-Donas JG, Nikitas P, Obertová Z, Kranioti EF. Chapter 4.1 - Sex estimation using nonmetric variables: application of R functions. In: Obertová Z, Stewart A, Cattaneo S, editors. Statistics and Probability in Forensic Anthropology. Academic Press; 2020:139–153.
   Google Scholar
• (SWGANTH) SW group for FA. Ancestry assessment. 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Fernandes LCC, Bento MIC, Rabello PM, et al. Analysis of the accuracy of AncesTrees software in ancestry estimation in Brazilian identified sample. Adv Anthropol. 2021;11(02):163–178. doi:10.4236/aa.2021.112011
   Google Scholar
• Christensen AM, Passalacqua NV, Bartelink EJ. Forensic anthropology: current methods and practice. 2013.
   Google Scholar
• van den Eeden CAJ, de Poot CJ, van Koppen PJ. The forensic confirmation bias: a comparison between experts and novices. J Forensic Sci. 2019;64(1):120–126. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13817
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dror I, Melinek J, Arden JL, et al. Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. J Forensic Sci. 2021;66(5):1751–1757. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.14697
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar