非洲和美国黑人马氏指数

Males Sample SDurce Female8 Index
' The number of subjects (N) in each age group exceeds 25.
SKELIC INDEX OF BLACK GROUPS IN AFRICA AND U.S.A.
TABLE 2
65
Skelic index averages for black adult groups of each sex residing in Africa and the United States
RESULTS
Table 1 pertains to the skelic index at ages
AM. J. PHYS. ANTHROP. (1979)51: 63-66.
8, 9, 13, and 15 years. The highest values represent Bantu children and youths of the Nyakyusa tribe measured during 1969-1970 in the Rungwe highland area of Tanzania. Bantu children and youths of the Dig0 tribe measured about 1950 at Sambweni coastal villages in Kenya, and Sara children of the Chad Republic measured in 1965 a t FortArchambault, also yield higher indices than those for corresponding age-sex groups of United States black children and youths measured during 1923-1924 in New York City, 1925-1926 in Atlanta, and 1974-1977 in Columbia. The “mainly Bantu, Tanzania” sampling was described as including members of some tribes showing “ethiopian (Hamitic) influence,” and other tribes showing “arab-oriental influence” (Jurgens, ’66).The Nyakyusa tribe “does not show marked ethiopian or arab characteristics.” Possibly herein is the source of the skelic index differences between the two Tanzanian samples. Presented in table 2 are skelic index values on adult inhabitants of Africa and the United States. The values for United States males are all below 100, whereas 10 of those for African males are 100 or higher. With one exception, mean lower limb height of United States females does not exceed 95%of sitting height; on 11 groups of African females, mean lower limb height is above 95% of mean sitting height.
Sample Source
R
Age in years
9
13
1.5
Nyakyusa, Tanzania Digo, Kenya Sara, Chad ' Mainly Bantu, Tanzania
African black males Hautvast, '71 MacKay and Martin, '52 Hiernaux and Aanea, '74 Jurgens, '66 United States black males
The following generalization appeared in a recent issue of the American Journal of Physical Anthropology: “Afro-Americans have somewhat longer legs to sitting height than Africans” (Eveleth, ’78). This inference was drawn on comparing outcomes of two African studies (M. D. Janes, unpublished; Jurgens, ’66) with those of two Afro-American studies (Krogman, ’70; Verghese et al., ’69). More extensive examination of findings on black groups in Africa and the United States requires withdrawal of the generalization. Before proceeding, it should be noted that the Eveleth (’78) article has several different facets besides the one considered here. The article should be read for its methodologic proposal, and its full content on human body growth.
94 94
94
93 94 92 91 89
102 102 100 100 99
101 100
101 101
91
90
92
-
94 93 88
104
98
Nyakyusa, Tanzania ' Sara, Chad I Digo, Kenya I Mainly Bantu, Tanzania
l
African black females Hautvast, '71 Hiernaux and Asnes, '74 MacKay and Martin, '52 Jurgens, '66 United States black females
*
Krogman, '70 Verghese et al.,'69 Hamill et al., '73; Malina et al., '74 Herskovits, '30 Sterling, '28 Meredith and Spurgeon, '76; Spurgeon et al., '78
63
64
HOWARD V. MEREDITH
TABLE 1
Skelic index (lower limb height in percentage of sitting height) at four ages on black children and .youths liuing in Africa and the United States
KEY WORDS Body form . Skelic index Ethnic crossing Black Homo sapiens . Age and sex differences
.
ABSTRACT This article examines a recently reported generalization. Materials from more than a score of investigations are drawn upon. These materials show there is not a substantial research base for the claim that interbreeding in the United States between black people of African ancestry and white people of European ancestry has resulted in increased lower limb height relative to sitting height.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Two tables were constructed with the aid of statistics from 22 published studies. Each study provided arithmetic means on one or more human age-groups for distance from vertex to soles (total height) and distance from vertex t o the subischial plane (sitting height). Total height minus sitting height gave mean lower limb height. The skelic index was computed using the formula: lower limb height x 100Isitting height.