Cranio-morphometric and aDNA corroboration of the Austronesian dispersal model in ancient Island Southeast Asia: Support from Gua Harimau, Indonesia

[Skull-facial anthropometric traits of forensic odontological interest for estimating sex, race and age. Review of the literature]

One of the main functions of anthropologists and forensic dentists is to identify subjects according to physical characteristics of the features presented using non-routine methods. These characteristics, especially bone, allow professional to determine the sex, age and racial origin of the remains or skeleton found. Dentist focus on features belonging to the stomatognathic system, while anthropologists study the bones that make up the human body. In this study, we describe the investigations of cranio-facial anthropometric features of dental interest carried out by anthropologists to identify the sex, race and age of skeletal remains or skeletons. in addition, we describe the so-called dental anthropology that studies the elements of the stomatognathic system from an anthropological point of view. Electronic literature was reviewed through search engines such as PUBMED, Google Academic and SciELO with the search terms "Forensic Dentistry, Forensic Anthropology, Sex Determination, Ancestry Determination and Age Determination". Knowledge of the craniofacial anthropological features from the forensic point of view is of great importance in individualized and multidisciplinary studies by forensic dentists and anthropologists in the identification of skeletal remains.

Craniometrics Reveal "Two Layers" of Prehistoric Human Dispersal in Eastern Eurasia

This cranio-morphometric study emphasizes a “two-layer model” for eastern Eurasian anatomically modern human (AMH) populations, based on large datasets of 89 population samples including findings directly from ancient archaeological contexts. Results suggest that an initial “first layer” of AMH had related closely to ancestral Andaman, Australian, Papuan, and Jomon groups who likely entered this region via the Southeast Asian landmass, prior to 65–50 kya. A later “second layer” shared strong cranial affinities with Siberians, implying a Northeast Asian source, evidenced by 9 kya in central China and then followed by expansions of descendant groups into Southeast Asia after 4 kya. These two populations shared limited initial exchange, and the second layer grew at a faster rate and in greater numbers, linked with contexts of farming that may have supported increased population densities. Clear dichotomization between the two layers implies a temporally deep divergence of distinct migration routes for AMH through both southern and northern Eurasia.