Case studies

Liebenberg et al (2015) → South Africa

• The wide range of morphological variation among groups in South Africa shows that social history shapes skeletal data

• Apartheid-enforced segregation created detectable postcranial differences

White south Africans achieve higher classification accuracy

• Less within-group variation as a result of stricter segregation and assortative mating

• Not a result of a ‘distinct biological’ difference

Difficulty between black and coloured South African’s

• Remains were frequently confused with each other due to overlap in morphology

• Reflects more complex and shared population histories

Factors shaping post cranial variation in SA

• Varying geographic origins

• Unqiue population histories

• Decades of positive assortative mating/barriers to gene flow

Cox et al (2006) → Maori remains

• For Maori communities identifying remains as Maori carries cultural significance as concepts of respect for the dead are central

Challenges in identifying Maori Ancestry

• Difficulty distinguishing Maori from other Polynesian groups

• Prevalence of mixed ancestry

• Lack of population specific reference data

Social importance of ancestry estimation

• Maori case shows that ancestry identification can be important for cultural rights and community obligations to the dead

Broader lessons from South Africa, Maori and Hispanic examples

• Context is important

• Ancestry estimation accuracy depend on local population history, social structure, data coverage and community significance