Laboratory of Advanced Imaging and 3D modelling, Section of Forensic Pathology, Department of Forensic Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Physical Anthropology Unit, Department of Biodiversity, Ecology, and Evolution, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Am J Biol Anthropol. 2023 Jan;180(1):224-234. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.24657. Epub 2022 Nov 16.
This study aimed to test the performance of 3D digitizer, CT scanner, and surface scanner in detecting cranial fluctuating asymmetry. Sets of 32 landmarks (6 in the midline and 13 bilateral) were acquired from 14 archeological crania using a 3D digitizer, and from 3D models generated from a CT scanner and surface scanner using Viewbox 4. Levels of shape variation were analyzed in MorphoJ using Procrustes analysis of variance and Principal component analysis. Intra-observer error accounted for 1.7%, 1.8%, and 4.5% of total shape variation for 3D digitizer, CT scanner, and surface scanner respectively. Fluctuating asymmetry accounted for 15%-16% of total shape variation. Variation between techniques accounted for 18% of total shape variation. We found a higher level of missing landmarks in our surface scan data than for both 3D digitizer and CT scanner data, and both 3D model-based techniques sometimes obscured taphonomic damage. All three 3D techniques are appropriate for measuring cranial fluctuating asymmetry. We advise against combining data collected with different techniques.
本研究旨在测试 3D 数字化仪、CT 扫描仪和表面扫描仪在检测颅骨波动不对称性方面的性能。使用 3D 数字化仪从 14 个考古颅骨中获取了 6 个中线和 13 个双侧的 32 个标志点，使用 Viewbox 4 从 CT 扫描仪和表面扫描仪生成的 3D 模型中获取了相同的标志点。使用 MorphoJ 中的 Procrustes 方差分析和主成分分析分析了形状变化的水平。对于 3D 数字化仪、CT 扫描仪和表面扫描仪，观察者内误差分别占总形状变化的 1.7%、1.8%和 4.5%。波动不对称性占总形状变化的 15%-16%。技术之间的差异占总形状变化的 18%。我们发现，与 3D 数字化仪和 CT 扫描仪数据相比，我们的表面扫描数据中缺失的标志点更多，而且这两种基于 3D 模型的技术有时会掩盖埋葬学损伤。所有三种 3D 技术都适用于测量颅骨波动不对称性。我们建议不要将不同技术收集的数据合并。
