Print

Print
A point that I have noticed in the literature on ageing is that many people still rely upon Silver's (1969) old epiphyseal fusion graphs. If you notice, he reversed the information for phalanges, instead giving the information for the proximal in the place of the distal. Anyone who has read Halbermahl and other German/Swiss sources would recognize this, but most english-only readers would not.
 

Haskel J. Greenfield, Ph.D.
Professor of Anthropology
University of Manitoba
Department of Anthropology, FA 435
Winnipeg, MB R3T 5V5, Canada
Work Telephone: +204-474-6332
Home Telephone: +204-489-4962
Fax: +204-474-7600
Email: [log in to unmask]
http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/anthropology/cvgreenfield.html

GOD PUT ME ON EARTH TO ACCOMPLISH A CERTAIN NUMBER OF THINGS.
RIGHT NOW I'M SO FAR BEHIND I WILL NEVER DIE!

-----Original Message-----
From: Zooarchaeology is the analysis of Animal remains from archaeological sites [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Dr Jaco Weinstock
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 3:37 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: cat fusion

Dear Salima,
reading Habermehl (1975) more carefully I realized that he is quoting investigations by Schaeffer (1932).
the epiphyseal closure times that he gives are the following:

ca. 8½ months: coracoid process in scapula, acetabulum in pelvis, distal humerus, proximal radius, calcaneus, and (apparently) both proximal and distal epiphyses in Femur

ca. 10 months: proximal ulna and phalanges

ca. 11½ months: distal metapodials, proximal humerus, distal radius and ulna, both epiphyses in the tibia, and distal fibula.

He mentions, however, that according to Kayanja (1970), the fusion times for the distal and proximal end of the humerus are 7¾ and 8½ months respectively.

It would be interesting to compare these fusion times with those of Smith (1969)...

regards,
Jaco

--
Dr. Jaco Weinstock
Research Fellow (archaeozoology)
Department of Archaeology
University of Southampton
SO17 1BJ Southampton, UK
Tel: +44 (0)23 8059 4778