GOUGH'S CAVE 1: STUDY OF PELVIS AND LOWER LIMBS 



Table 5 Length measurements of the Gough's Cave 1 femora and 

 osteometries of the femoral diaphyses . 



Right 



Left 



Maximum length (M-l) 



Bicondylar length (M-2) 



Trochanteric length (M-3) 



Bicondylar trochanteric length (M-4) 



Biomechanical length 1 



Midshaft antero-posterior diameter (M-6) 



Midshaft medio-lateral diameter (M-7) 



Midshaft circumference (M-8) 



Subtrochanteric antero-posterior diameter (M- 10) 2 



Subtrochanteric medio-lateral diameter (M-9) 



Subtrochanteric circumference 



Anterior curvature chord (M-27) 



Anterior curvature subtense 



Anterior curvature subtense position 3 



1 Distance parallel (o the diaphyseal axis between the intersection of that axis with 

 the proximal neck (just medial of the greater trochanter) and the average of the 

 positions along the diaphyseal axis of the distal condyles (Ruff & Hayes, 1983). 



2 The subtrochanteric diameters are taken as the maximum medio-lateral dimension 

 (usually close to the antero-medial to postero-lateral plane of anteversion) and the 

 antero-posterior diameter perpendicular to that medio-lateral one. 



3 Distance from the proximal end of the chord to the position of the maximum 

 subtense. 



Table 6 Cross-sectional second moments of area of the Gough's Cave 1 

 femoral diaphyses (in mm 4 and degrees). 



443.0 



437.5 



439.0 



433.0 



423.0 



424.5 



413.0 



413.0 



415.3 



408.0 



33.7 



30.2 



24.8 



23.8 



92.0 



85.5 



28.2 



27.6 



31.5 



31.7 



94.0 



93.0 



303.0 



295.0 



9.5 



8.5 



133.0 



117.0 



Right 



Left 



20% AP second moment of area (I x ) 

 20% ML second moment of area (I ) 

 20% Maximum second moment of area 

 20% Minimum second moment of area 

 20% Polar moment of area (J) 

 20% Angle of I max (theta) 

 35% AP second moment of area (I x ) 

 35% ML second moment of area (I ) 



y 



35% Maximum second moment of area 



35% Minimum second moment of area 



35% Polar moment of area (J) 



35% Angle of I max (theta) 



50% AP second moment of area (I x ) 



50% ML second moment of area (I ) 

 y 

 50% Maximum second moment of area 



50% Minimum second moment of area 



50% Polar moment of area (J) 



50% Angle of I max (theta) 



65% AP second moment of area (I ) 



65% ML second moment of area (I ) 

 y 

 65% Maximum second moment of area 



65% Minimum second moment of area 



65% Polar moment of area (J) 



65% Angle of 1^ (theta) 



80% AP second moment of area (I x ) 



80% ML second moment of area (I ) 

 y 

 80% Maximum second moment of area 



80% Minimum second moment of area 



80% Polar moment of area (J) 



80% Angle of I (theta) 



(I ) 



tfnJ 



(IJ 



(U 



(I ) 



A—) 

 (I J 



35927.1 

 39249.1 

 40399.9 

 34776.2 

 75176.1 



27° 

 35539.9 

 20315.4 

 35629.1 

 20226.3 

 55855.4 



94° 



39160.3 

 21418.6 

 40129.3 

 20449.5 

 60578.8 



103° 

 39874.0 

 23495.7 

 41309.5 

 22060.2 

 63369.7 



106° 

 30878.2 

 31956.3 

 33380.3 

 29454.2 

 62834.5 



37° 



29219.4 

 35295.2 

 36884.4 

 27630.1 

 64514.5 



25° 

 28073.8 

 20642.1 

 28972.0 

 19743.9 

 48715.9 



108° 

 28671.0 

 21693.3 

 30867.6 

 19496.7 

 50364.3 



116° 

 29467.0 

 22797.5 

 31796.8 

 20467.7 

 52264.5 



117° 

 30129.1 

 31368.4 

 34249.7 

 27247.8 

 61497.5 



40° 



((max - min)/max) x 100]. In contrast, in the proximal diaphysis, 

 even though the right side continues to be larger, the level of 

 asymmetry is much less, with cortical area exhibiting 4.8% asymme- 

 try and the polar moment of area providing only a 2. 1 % contrast. 



The lineae asperae are smooth along the entire lengths of the bones, 

 which is possibly the product of the young adult age of the individual. 

 They are along prominent pilasters for most of the middle half to two- 



thirds of the diaphysis. The pilasters are formed by antero-posteriorly 

 convex medial surfaces but distinctly antero-posteriorly concave 

 lateral surfaces. This results in a sulcus along the lateral pilaster 

 especially in the midshaft region. The lineae asperae taper off gradually 

 disto-medially, ending in moderate adductor tubercles. 



The prominence of the Gough's Cave 1 pilasters is evident by their 

 pilastric indices of 1 35.9 and 126.9. Both of them, and especially the 

 right one, are well above the means of Mesolithic (109.5 ± 10.6, N = 

 52) and Mesolithic male (1 13.0 ± 9.2, N = 34) samples. This is 

 further and better illustrated, albeit with smaller comparative samples, 

 by the Gough's Cave 1 I /I and I /I ratios (Table 7) along the 



J ° x y max mm v / o 



middle third of the diaphysis (the 35%, 50% and 65% sections). 

 Again, the right femur is more pilastric than the left one. 



Proximally, the markings in the pectineal region are very light, and 

 they are bordered laterally by small but rugose gluteal tuberosities 

 (Fig. 8). Neither gluteal tuberosity is projecting or concave, and there 

 is no trace of hypotrochanteric fossae. The right tuberosity fades out 

 proximally, but the left one leads to a small tubercle at the proximo- 

 distal level of the lesser trochanter. The modest dimensions of the 

 Gough's Cave 1 gluteal tuberosities are demonstrated by compari- 

 sons of their maximum breadths. The absolute breadths (8.2 and 8.4 

 mm) are below the means Mesolithic (1 1.6 ± 1.9 mm, N = 17) and 

 especially Mesolithic male ( 12.3 ± 1.9 mm, N = 10) samples. This is 

 further illustrated by indices between the gluteal tuberosity breadths 

 and the geometric means of the associated subtrochanteric diaphy- 

 seal diameters - the mean of the resultant values of 27.5 and 28.4 for 

 Gough's Cave 1 are 1.91 and 1.98 standard deviations below the 

 means respectively of Mesolithic (42.3 ± 7.5, N = 1 7) and Mesolithic 

 male (43.0 ± 7.6, N = 10) samples. 



The gluteal buttresses are pronounced, with distinct sulci formed 

 anteriorly and posteriorly. The right one is covered posteriorly by the 

 gluteal tuberosity, but the left gluteal tuberosity covers only the 

 medial half of the buttress. Nonetheless, the subtrochanteric diaphy- 

 ses of Gough's Cave 1 are relatively round compared to those of most 

 Mesolithic femora. Its meric indices of 89.5 and 87.1 are 2.49 and 

 2.84 standard deviations above the means respectively of pooled 

 Mesolithic (74.6 ± 5.5, N = 85) and Mesolithic male (75.8 ± 4.4, N 

 = 50) samples. However, the large sample Muge has significantly 

 lower meric indices (73.0 ± 4.8, N - 55) than the remainder of the 

 Mesolithic sample (P < 0.001). Yet even using only non-Muge 

 Mesolithic remains for the comparison still places the Gough's Cave 

 1 femora 1.93 standard deviations from the mean (77.5 ± 5.6, N = 

 30). Similarly, the proximal diaphyseal (80%) I /I s ratios are 2.43 

 and 2.70 standard deviations below the means of respective Mesolithic 

 samples (Table 7). 



Table 7 Comparative femoral second moment of area diaphyseal shape 

 indices, I/I and I max /I min , for Gough's Cave 1 and Mesolithic samples. 

 For Mesolithic samples, mean ± SD is given. 



I/I 



Gough's Cave 1: 

 Right; Left 



Mesolithic Sample Mesolithic Males 



20% 

 35% 

 50% 

 65% 

 80% 



I max /I m 



20% 

 35% 

 50% 

 65% 



0.92; 0.83 

 1.75; 1.36 

 1.83;1.32 

 1.70; 1.29 

 0.97; 0.96 



1.16; 1.33 

 1.76; 1.47 

 1.96; 1.58 

 1.87; 1.55 

 1.13; 1.26 



0.66 ±0.08 

 1.01 ±0.15 

 1.18 ±0.23 

 1.00 + 0.21 

 0.77 ±0.20 



1.58 + 0.19 

 1.20 + 0.12 

 1.33 ±0.19 



1.32 ±0.26 

 1.90 ±0.29 



N= 16 

 N=14 

 N = 55 

 N= 15 



N = 52 



N= 13 



N= 11 

 N = 45 

 N= 12 

 N = 41 



0.68 ± 0.07; N= 10 

 1.02±0.20;N = 8 

 1.20 ± 0.22; N = 37 

 1.08 ±0.17; N = 9 

 0.79 ± 0.19; N = 34 



1.54 ±0.18; N = 8 

 1.26 ±0.12; N = 6 

 1.33 ± 0.19; N = 30 

 1.25±0.13;N = 7 

 1.87 ± 0.25; N = 27 



