Abstract
Estimatation of body mass of skeletons with mechanical method (femoral head body mass estimation - FH) and non-mechanical method (stature/living bi-iliac breadth body mass estimation - ST/LBIB) and comparison of reliability and potential use of results obtained with both methods is presented. The material (46 skeletons, 26 males, 20 females) came from Cedynia, Poland.
Body mass reconstruction according to non-mechanical method was made using equations proposed by Ruff et al. (2005). Body mass estimation based on the mechanical method was calculated using formulas proposed by Ruff et al. (1995).
In the mechanical body mass reconstruction method, femoral superoinferior breadth was used. econstruction of body weight using the non-mechanical method was based on maximum pelvic breadth and reconstructed body height. The correlation between bi-iliac breadth and femoral head measurements and the correlation between femoral head and reconstructed body height were also calculated.
The significance of differences between body mass values obtained with the mechanical (FH) and the non-mechanical method (ST/LBIB) was tested using Pearson's correlation. The same test was used for the calculation of the relationship between bi-iliac breadth and femoral head easurements and between femoral head and reconstructed body height.
In contrast to females, in males there is no statistically significant correlation between body mass estimated with the mechanical method (FH) and the non-mechanical method (ST/LBIB). In both sexes there was not statistically significant correlation between bi-iliac breadth and femoral head measurements.
Only in the females group the correlation between femoral head and reconstructed body height was statistically significant. It is worth to continue the research.
The obtained results would be a valuable contribution to the knowledge on body mass reconstruction methods.