Articular and diaphyseal remodeling of the proximal femur with changes in body mass in adults.

Proximal femoral dimensions were measured from radiographs of 80 living subjects whose current body weight and body weight at initial skeletal maturity (18 years) could be ascertained. Results generally support the hypothesis that articular size does not change in response to changes in mechanical loading (body weight) in adults, while diaphyseal cross-sectional size does. This can be explained by considering the different bone remodeling constraints characteristic of largely trabecular bone regions (articulations) and largely compact cortical bone regions (diaphyses). The femoral neck shows a pattern apparently intermediate between the two, consistent with its structure. When the additional statistical "noise" created by an essentially static femoral head size is accounted for, the present study supports other studies that have demonstrated rather marked positive allometry in femoral articular and shaft cross-sectional dimensions to body mass among adult humans. Body weight prediction equations developed from these data give reasonable results for modern U.S. samples, with average percent prediction errors of about 10%-16% for individual weights and about 2% for sample mean weights using the shaft dimension equations. When predicting body weight from femoral head size in earlier human samples, a downward correction factor of about 10% is suggested to account for the increased adiposity of very recent U.S. adults.

[1]  W. M. Krogman The human skeleton in forensic medicine. I. , 1963, Postgraduate medicine.

[2]  M. Sherman,et al.  The pathology of ununited fractures of the neck of the femur. , 1939, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[3]  R. Watson Bone growth and physical activity in young males , 1973 .

[4]  J. Fleagle Size and Adaptation in Primates , 1985 .

[5]  D A Nagel,et al.  Humeral hypertrophy in response to exercise. , 1977, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  S. Gould,et al.  Allometry in primates, with emphasis on scaling and the evolution of the brain. , 1975, Contributions to primatology.

[7]  Christopher B. Ruff,et al.  Hindlimb articular surface allometry in hominoidea and Macaca, with comparisons to diaphyseal scaling , 1988 .

[8]  David B. Burr,et al.  Structure, Function, and Adaptation of Compact Bone , 1989 .

[9]  H. Gray,et al.  BODY WEIGHT IN TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY-NINE ADULTS: WHICH STANDARD IS THE BEST? , 1920 .

[10]  M. Hofman Allometric scaling in palaeontology: A critical survey , 1988 .

[11]  G. Lloyd-Roberts The role of capsular changes in osteoarthritis of the hip joint. , 1953, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[12]  Friedrich Pauwels,et al.  Biomechanics of the Normal and Diseased Hip , 1976 .

[13]  R. Martin,et al.  Brain Size Allometry Ontogeny and Phylogeny , 1985 .

[14]  M. A. Little,et al.  Cross-sectional growth of nomadic Turkana pastoralists. , 1983, Human biology.

[15]  H. Mchenry Sexual dimorphism inAustralopithecus afarensis , 1991 .

[16]  M. F. Ericksen How "representative" is the Terry collection? evidence from the proximal femur. , 1982, American journal of physical anthropology.

[17]  W. Hayes,et al.  Sex differences in age‐related remodeling of the femur and tibia , 1988, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[18]  S. Swartz The functional morphology of weight bearing: limb joint surface area allometry in anthropoid primates , 1989 .

[19]  K. Steudel Patterns of intraspecific and interspecific allometry in Old World primates. , 1982, American journal of physical anthropology.

[20]  E. Braunstein,et al.  The diagnostic value of buttressing of the femoral neck. , 1978, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[21]  P. Jolicoeur Linear Regressions in Fishery Research: Some Comments , 1975 .

[22]  Weight-Height Standards Based on World War II Experience , 1958 .

[23]  W. Hayes,et al.  Cross-sectional geometry of Pecos Pueblo femora and tibiae--a biomechanical investigation: I. Method and general patterns of variation. , 1983, American journal of physical anthropology.

[24]  L. F. Marcus,et al.  BIVARIATE LINEAR MODELS IN BIOMETRY , 1977 .

[25]  C. Ruff,et al.  Structural allometry of the femur and tibia in Hominoidea and Macaca. , 1987, Folia primatologica; international journal of primatology.

[26]  W. Mcganity,et al.  A study of the dietary background and nutriture of the Navajo Indian. , 1956, The Journal of nutrition.

[27]  W C Hayes,et al.  The effect of prolonged physical training on the properties of long bone: a study of Wolff's Law. , 1981, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[28]  M. Pagel,et al.  Taxonomic differences in the scaling of brain on body weight among mammals. , 1989, Science.