Реконструкция активности в биоархеологии: энтезисные изменения и их применение в Прибайкалье Сибири

Энтезисные изменения (ЭИ; entheseal на английском) - это морфологические изменения в местах прикрепления мышц и связок на скелете. Эти изменения стали использоваться в биоархеологических реконструкциях начиная, с 1990-х годов для понимания древних активностей, таких как мобильность, стратегии жизнеобеспечения и гендерное разделение труда. Интерпретации энтесизных изменений основаны на концепции функциональной адаптации костей, когда морфология костей отражает механические нагрузки в течение жизни. Однако связь между энтезами и древней активностью является сложной, поскольку существует множество взаимосвязующих переменных, включая возраст, пол и размер тела, которые могут влиять на выраженность энтеза. В данной статье рассматриваются исследования этезисных изменений в биоархеологических исследованиях: 1) описываются энтезы, их типы и изменения, и методы их документирования; 2) суммируются основные факторы, влияющие на морфологию энтезов, и обсуждаются преимущества и ограничения данных исследований. Кроме того, поскольку использование методов энтезисных изменений на археологических популяциях людей с дополнительными подтверждающими данными может усилить интерпретацию деятельности в прошлом, обсуждается пример их применения к остеологическим останкам людей неолита и бронзового века из региона Прибайкалья в Восточной Сибири. В целом бывает трудно связать энтезисные изменения с определенной деятельностью из-за их многофакторной этиологии, различных методологических проблем и тафономических ограничений при работе с археологическими скелетными останками людей. Однако последние научные исследования продолжают демонстрировать полезность применения энтезисных изменений для реконструкции деятельности древних населений.

маркеры стресса опорно-двигательного аппарата, реконструкция деятельности, биоархеология, энтезисные изменения, биомеханика, костная адаптация, археология Прибайкалья, морфология скелета, охотники-рыболовы

1. al-Oumaoui I., Jiménez-Brobeil S., du Souich P. Markers of activity patterns in some populations of the Iberian Peninsula // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2004. No. 14(5). Pp. 343-59.

2. Alves Cardoso F., Henderson C. The categorisation of occupation in identified skeletal collections: A source of bias? // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2013. No. 23(2). Pp. 186-96. DOI: 10.1002/oa.2285.

3. Auerbach B.M., Ruff C.B. Human body mass estimation: A comparison of “morphometric” and “mechanical” methods // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2004. No. 125. Pp. 331-342.

4. Benjamin M., Evans E.J., Copp L. The histology of tendon attachments to bone in man // Journal of Anatomy. 1986. No. 149. Pp. 89-100.

5. Benjamin M., Kumai T., Milz S., Boszczyk B.M., Boszczyk A.A., Ralphs J.R. The skeletal attachment of tendons-tendon’ entheses.’ // Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A. 2002. No. 133. Pp. 931-45.

6. Benjamin M., McGonagle D. Entheses: Tendon and ligament attachment sites // Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports. 2009. No. 19 (4). Pp. 520-27. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2009.00906

7. Benjamin M., Toumi H., Ralphs J.R., Bydder G., Best T.M., Milz S. Where tendons and ligaments meet bone: Attachment sites (‘entheses’) in relation to exercise and/or mechanical load // Journal of Anatomy. 2006. No. 208(4). Pp. 471-90. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2006.00540.

8. Davis C.B., Shuler K.A., Danforth M.E., Herndon K.E. Patterns of interobserver error in the scoring of entheseal changes // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2013. No. 23(3). Pp. 147-51. DOI: 10.1002/oa.2277.

9. Dewey J.K. Evaluating entheseal changes from a commingled and fragmentary population: Republic Groves. 2018. MA thesis. Florida Atlantic University. 77 p.

10. Eshed V., Gopher A., Galili E., Hershkovitz I. Musculoskeletal stress markers in Natufian hunter-gatherers and Neolithic farmers in the Levant: The upper limb // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2004. No. 123(4). Pp. 303-315. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.10312.

11. Foster A., Buckley H., Tayles N. Using enthesis robusticity to infer activity in the past: A review // Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory. 2014. No. 21. Pp. 511-533. DOI: 10.1007/s10816-012-9156-1.

12. Goebel T. Pleistocene human colonization of Siberia and peopling of the Americas: an ecological approach // Evolutionary Anthropology. 1999. No. 8. Pp. 208-227.

13. Havelková P., Villotte S. Enthesopathies: Test of reproducibility of the new scoring system based on current medical data. Slovak Anthropology. 2007. No. 10(1). Pp. 51-57.

14. Hawkey D.E., and Merbs C.F. Activity-induced musculoskeletal stress markers (MSM) and subsistence strategy changes among ancient Hudson Bay Eskimos // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 1995. No. 5. Pp. 324-38. DOI: 10.1002/oa.1390050403

15. Henderson C.Y., Mariotti V., Pany-Kucera D., Villotte S., Wilczak C. Recording specific entheseal changes of fibrocartilaginous entheses: Initial tests using the Coimbra method // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2013. No. 23 (2). Pp. 152-62. DOI: 10.1002/oa.2287.

16. Henderson C.Y., Mariotti V., Pany-Kucera D., Villotte S., Wilczak C. The new ‘Coimbra Method’: A biologically appropriate method for recording specific features of fibrocartilaginous entheseal changes // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2016. No. 26(5). Pp. 925-32. DOI: 10.1002/oa.2477.

17. Jurmain R., Alves Cardoso F, Henderson C., Villotte S. Bioarchaeology’s holy grail: the reconstruction of activity. In A Companion to Paleopathology, Ed. by A.L. Grauer, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. Pp. 531-52. DOI: 10.1002/9781444345940

18. Karakostis, F.A., Hotz G., Scherf H., Wahl J., Harvati K. Occupational manual activity is reflected on the patterns among hand entheses // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2017. No. 164(1). Pp. 30-40. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.23253.

19. Karakostis, F.A., Hotz G., Scherf H., Wahl J., Harvati K. A repeatable geometric morphometric approach to the analysis of hand entheseal three-dimensional form // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2018. No. 166 (1). Pp. 246-60. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.23421.

20. Karakostis F.A., Lorenzo C. Morphometric patterns among the 3D surface areas of human hand entheses // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2016. No. 160(4). Pp. 694-707. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.22999.

21. Karakostis F.A., Reyes-Centeno H., Franken M., Hotz G., Rademaker K., Harvati K. Biocultural evidence of precise manual activities in an Early Holocene individual of the high-altitude Peruvian Andes // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2021. No. 174(1). Pp. 35-48. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.24160.

22. Karakostis F.A., Wallace I.J, Konow N., Harvati K. Experimental evidence that physical activity affects the multivariate associations among muscle attachments (entheses) // Journal of Experimental Biology. 2019. No. 22(3). Pp. 1-7. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.213058.

23. Kennedy, K.A. Morphological variations in ulnar supinator crests and fossae as identifying markers of occupational stress. // Journal of Forensic Science. 1983. No. 28(4). Pp. 871-76.

24. Lieverse A.R., Bazaliiskii V.I, Goriunova O.I, Weber A.W. Lower limb activity in the Cis-Baikal: Entheseal changes among Middle Holocene Siberian foragers // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2013. No. 150(3). Pp. 421-32. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.22217.

25. Lieverse A.R., Weber A.W., Bazaliiskiy V.I., Goriunova O.I, Savel’ev N.A. Osteoarthritis in Siberia’s Cis-Baikal: Skeletal indicators of hunter-gatherer adaptation and cultural change // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2007. No. 132(1). Pp. 1-16. 10.1002/ajpa.20479.

26. Lieverse, A.R. Health and Behavior in Mid-Holocene Cis-Baikal: Biological indicators of adaptation and culture change. In Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers of the Baikal Region, Siberia. Ed. by A.W. Weber, M.A. Katzenberg, T.G. Schurr. Philadelphia - University of Pennsylvania, 2010. 135-174 p. DOI: 10.9783/9781934536391.135

27. Lieverse A.R., Stock J.T., Katzenberg M.A., Haverkort C.M. The bioarchaeology of habitual activity and dietary change in the Siberian Middle Holocene. In Human Bioarchaeology of the Transition to Agriculture. Ed. by R. Pinhasi, J.T. Stock-Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2011. 263-291 p. DOI: 10.1002/9780470670170.ch11.

28. Lieverse A.R., Mack B., Bazaliiskii V.I., Weber A.W. Revisiting osteoarthritis in the Cis- Baikal: Understanding behavioral variability and adaptation among Middle Holocene foragers // Quaternary International. 2016. No. 405. Pp. 160-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2015.03.019.

29. Lieverse A.R., Mack B., Bazaliiskii V.I., Goriunova O.I., Weber A.W. Upper limb musculoskeletal stress markers among Middle Holocene foragers of Siberia’s Cis-Baikal region // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2009. No. 138. Pp. 458-472.

30. Losey R.J., Nomokonova T, and Goriunova O.I. Fishing ancient Lake Baikal, Siberia: Inferences from the reconstruction of harvested perch (Perca fluviatilis) size // Journal of Archaeological Science. 2008. No. 35(3). Pp. 577-590. 10.1016/j.jas.2007.05.005.

31. Macintosh A. Non-metric skeletal variation. In Neolithic Hunter-Gatherers of the Cis-Baikal, Siberia. MA thesis, University of Saskatoon. 2011. 212 p.

32. Mariotti V., Facchini F., Belcastro M.G. Enthesopathies-Proposal of a standardized acoring method and applications // Collegium Antropologicum. 2004. No. 28(1). Pp. 145-59.

33. Mariotti V., Facchini F., Belcastro M.G. The study of entheses: Proposal of a standardised scoring method for twenty-three entheses of the postcranial skeleton // Collegium Antropologicum. 2007. No. 31(1) pp. 291-313.

34. Mazza B. Entheseal changes among Late Holocene hunter-gatherers from the southern extreme of La Plata Basin [Argentina] // Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences. 2019. No. 11(5). Pp. 1865-1885. DOI: 10.1007/s12520-018-0638-2.

35. Michopoulou E., Nikita E., Henderson C.Y. A test of the effectiveness of the Coimbra method in capturing activity-induced entheseal changes // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2017. No. 27(3). Pp. 409-17. DOI: 10.1002/oa.2564.

36. Michopoulou E., Nikita E., Valakos E.D. Evaluating the efficiency of different Recording Protocols for Entheseal Changes in Regards to Expressing Activity Patterns Using archival data and cross-sectional geometric properties // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2015. No. 158(4). Pp. 557-568. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.22822.

37. Milella M., Belcastro M.G., Zollikofer C.P.E., Mariotti V. The effect of age, sex, and physical activity on entheseal morphology in a contemporary Italian skeletal collection // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2012. No. 14(3). Pp. 379-88. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.22060.

38. Molnar P. Tracing prehistoric activities: Musculoskeletal stress marker analysis of a stone-age population on the island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2006. Vol. 129(1). Pp 1-23. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.20234.

39. Niinimäki S. What do muscle marker ruggedness scores actually tell us? // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2011, No. 21(3). Pp. 292-99. DOI: 10.1002/oa.1134.

40. Nikita E., Xanthopoulou P., Bertsatos A., Chovalopoulou M.E., Hafez I. A three-dimensional digital microscopic investigation of entheseal changes as skeletal activity markers // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2019. No. 169(4). Pp. 704-13. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.23850.

41. Nolte M., Wilczak C. Three-dimensional surface area of the distal biceps enthesis, relationship to body size, sex, age and secular changes in a 20th century American sample // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2013. No. 23(2). Pp. 163-74. DOI: 10.1002/oa.2292.

42. Pany-Kucera D., Viola B., Teschler-Nicola M. The scientific value of using a 3D surface scanner to quantify entheses. 2009. Workshop on musculoskeletal stress markers (MSM): Limitations and achievements in the reconstruction of past activity patterns, University of Coimbra. Coimbra, CIAS - Centro de Investigacao em Antropologia e Saude. Retrieved from: https://www.uc.pt/en/cia/msm/Pany_Viola_Teschler.pdf

43. Rabey K.N., Green D.J., Taylor A.B, Begun D.R., Richmond B.G, McFarlin S.C. Locomotor activity influences muscle architecture and bone growth but not muscle attachment site morphology // Journal of Human Evolution. 2015. No. 78. Pp. 91-102.

44. Rogers J., Shepstone L., Dieppe P. Bone formers: osteophyte and enthesophyte formation are positively associated. // Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 1997. Vol. 56(2). Pp. 85-90. DOI: 10.1136/ard.56.2.85.

45. Ruff C., Holt B., Trinkaus E. Who’s afraid of the big bad Wolff?: ‘Wolff’s law’ and bone functional adaptation // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2006. No. 129(4). Pp. 484-498. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.20371.

46. Ruff C.B., Niskanen M., Junno J.A., Jamison P. Body mass prediction from stature and bi-iliac breadth in two high latitude populations, with application to earlier higher latitude humans // Journal of Human Evolution. 2005. No. 48. Pp. 381-383.

47. Stock J.T., Bazaliiskii V., Goriunova O.I., Savel’ev N.A., and Weber A.W. Skeletal morphology, climatic adaptation, and habitual behavior among Mid-Holocene Cis-Baikal populations. 2010. In Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers of the Baikal Region, Siberia. Ed. by M.A. Katzenberg, T. Schurr - Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Pp. 193-216.

48. Turcotte C.M., Rabey K.N., Green DJ, and McFarlin S.C. Muscle attachment sites and behavioral reconstruction: An experimental test of muscle-bone structural response to habitual activity // American Journal of Biological Anthropology. 2021. No. 177(1). Pp. 1-20. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.24410.

49. Villotte S., Knüsel C.J. Understanding entheseal changes: Definition and life course changes // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2013. No. 23(2). Pp. 135-146. DOI: 10.1002/oa.2289.

50. Villotte S., Castex D., Couallier V., Dutour O., Knüsel C.J., Henry-Gambier D. Enthesopathies as occupational stress markers: Evidence from the upper limb // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2010. No. 142(2). Pp. 224-34. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.21217.

51. Villotte S., and Knüsel C.J. I Sing of Arms and of a Man...: Medial epicondylosis and the sexual division of labour in Prehistoric Europe // Journal of Archaeological Science. 2014, No. 43(1). Pp. 168-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2013.12.009.

52. Wallace I.J., Winchester J.M., Su A., Boyer D.M., Konow N. Physical activity alters limb bone structure but not entheseal morphology // Journal of Human Evolution. 2017. No. 107. Pp. 14-18. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhe.02.001.

53. Weber A.W. The Neolithic and Early Bronze Age of Lake Baikal region: a review of recent research // Journal of World Prehistory. 1995. No. 9. Pp. 99-165.

54. Weber, A.W., Bettinger R. Middle Holocene hunter-gatherers of Cis-Baikal, Siberia: an overview for the new century // Journal of Anthropological Archaeology. 2010. No. 29(4). Pp. 491-506. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaa.2010.08.002.

55. Weber, A.W., Ramsey C.B., Schulting R.J., Bazaliiskii V.I., Goriunova, O.I. Middle Holocene hunter-gatherers of Cis-Baikal, Eastern Siberia: chronology and dietary trends // Archaeological Research in Asia. 2021. No. 25. Pp. 1-21.

56. Weiss E. Examining activity patterns and biological confounding factors: Differences between fibrocartilaginous and fibrous musculoskeletal stress markers // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2015. No. 25(3). Pp. 281-88. DOI: 10.1002/oa.2290.

57. Weiss E., Corona L., Schultz B. Sex differences in musculoskeletal stress markers: Problems with activity pattern reconstructions // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2012, No. 22(1). Pp. 70-80. DOI: 10.1002/oa.1183.

58. Weiss E. Understanding muscle markers: Aggregation and construct validity // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2003, No. 121(3). Pp. 230-40. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.10226.

59. Weiss E. Understanding muscle markers: lower limbs // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2004, No. 125(3). Pp. 232-38. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.10397.

60. Weiss E. Muscle markers revisited: Activity pattern reconstruction with controls in a Central California Amerind population // American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2007. No. 133(3). Pp. 931-40. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.20607.

61. Wilczak C.A. Consideration of sexual dimorphism, age, and asymmetry in quantitative measurements of muscle insertion sites // International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 1998. No. 8(5). Pp. 311-325.

62. Wolff J. Ed. Concept of the law of bone remodelling. In The Law of Bone Remodelling, 1986. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 128 p.

63. Zumwalt A. The effect of endurance exercise on the morphology of muscle attachment sites // Journal of Experimental Biology. 2006. No. 209(3). Pp. 444-54.