DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN

HUMAN
AND NON-HUMAN BONES
 Introduction:
Since Carl Linné first formulated his systematic classificatory
nomenclature, Homo sapiens, the object anthropology as a science
focuses on, has been established as an integral part of the animal
kingdom sharing similar biological affinities with more or less related
species.

Yet, in practice and theory, various scientific disciplines regularly deal

with problems of precise, valid and mainly reliable determination of
biological samples.

 Likewise, distinguishing between human samples and samples of any

other origin comes as a primary precondition for any anthropological
expertise.
 Introduction:
Forensic anthropological investigations especially bear on this issue.
Being of service to legal systems and criminalistics, this discipline
unconditionally requires knowledge of the exact origin of recovered
osteological remains.

Identifying isolated or fragmentary bones can be difficult in

archaeological and forensic contexts. Numerous non-osseous
materials such as wood, pottery, plastics, or even rocks can sometimes
mimic human bones.

However, for instance, rocks are usually more heavier than bone and
the irregular bones that can easily be mistaken for rocks such as the
patella, wrist bones (carpals), or ankle bones (tarsals) tend to have a
relatively higher proportion of trabecular or cancellous bone, thus
making them much more lighter than rocks.
Identification:
There are generally three levels of identification that
can be utilized to distinguish between human and
animal bones namely;

a. Gross skeletal anatomy,

b. Bone macrostructure, and
c. Bone microstructure (histology).
 Skeletal Anatomy:
Cranial morphology differs dramatically
between humans and animals due to the
uniquely large brains that humans have
compared to body mass. Humans have
small faces compared to our large,
bulbous cranial vault and this minimizes
facial projection compared to animals.
Human vault musculature is less well
developed than in animals, who often
have developed sagittal and occipital
crests. Since animals (even large ones)
have much smaller brains, their cranial
bones are generally more curved and Figure 1: Primate crania with
individually smaller. brain masses indicated
Skeletal Anatomy:
The interior surface of animal vault bones usually have more
complex surface morphology than humans, whose interior
vault surfaces are relatively smooth occasionally embedded
with grooves from meningeal vessels.

Animal mandibles are often “V” shaped in superior/inferior

view and separate at the midline as opposed to the “U”
shaped singular construction of the human mandible.

 Human crania are oriented on a vertical axis and the orbits

are located in the front and above the nasal aperture.
Skeletal Anatomy:
In contrast, animal crania are oriented on a horizontal axis
and the orbits are located behind and lateral to the nasal
aperture.

These orientations also cause the position of the foramen

magnum to be located inferiorly in humans and posteriorly
in animals.
Human Cranial vault
 Some basic differences in human and animal
cranial anatomy are defined in Table 1 below:
Table 1. Differential Skeletal Anatomy of Humans and Animals: Cranium

Human Animal

Large bulbous vault, small face Small vault, large face

Pronounced muscle markings, sagittal crest

Vault relatively smooth
Inferior

Inferior Foramen Magnum Posterior Foramen Magnum

Chin present Chin absent

Orbits at front, above nasal aperture Orbits at sides, posterior to nasal aperture

Minimal nasal and midface projection Significant nasal and midface projection

"U"-shaped mandible (no midline separation) "V"-shaped mandible (separates at midline)

Dentition:
Dentition varies greatly between humans and animals, and
even between different species of animals.

Human teeth reflect a generalized design, including a mix of

slicing (incisors), puncturing (canines), and grinding (molars)
teeth. They are normally more rounded than animal teeth.

Most animal teeth reflect specialized dietary adaptations.

Grazing animals have more grinding teeth with specialized
ridges and carnivores have more shearing teeth with sharp
ridges.
Dentition:
In addition, many animals have different dental formulas
compared to humans. Dental formulas are annotated with
the number of each tooth type for a quadrant of the mouth.

Adult humans generally have a compliment of 32 teeth,

eight in each quadrant; this includes two incisors, one
canine, two premolars, and three molars (2:1:2:3).

Although highly variable, many placental mammals exhibit a

generalized dental formula that includes three incisors, one
canine, four premolars, and three molars (3:1:4:3).
Dentition:
 Some basic differences in human and animal
dentitions are defined in Table 2 below:
Table 2. Differential Skeletal Anatomy of Humans and Animals: Dentition

Human Animal

Omnivorous Carnivorous; Herbivorous; Omnivorous

Dental formula 2:1:2:3 Basic dental formula 3:1:4:3

Incisors (maxillary) are larger than other Horse maxillary incisors are larger than
mammals human incisors

Carnivores have large conical canines;

Canines small
Herbivores have small or missing canines

Carnivores have sharp, pointed cheek teeth;

Premolars and molars have low, rounded
Herbivores have broad, flat cheek teeth with
cusps divided by distinct grooves
parallel furrows and ridges
 Bone Macrostructure:
Animal bones have a greater density relative to size; they are less porous and are
thicker in cross section than the bones of humans.

 In humans, humeral and femoral cortical thickness is about ¼ of the total diameter
compared to about ½ of the total diameter in animal proximal limb bones.

Trabecula is largely absent from the interior of animal leg bone diaphyses, resulting
in a very smooth medullary surface compared to the web of trabecula (each of a
series or group of partitions formed by bands or columns of connective tissue,
especially a plate of the calcareous tissue forming cancellous bone.)covering the
medullary surface in human long bones.

Human cranial vault bones have thick diploe relative to cortical (tabular) bone
compared to the thin, more compact vault bones of animals.
 Some basic differences in animal and human
bone macrostructure are defined in Table 4.
Table 3. Differential Bone Macrostructure of Humans and Animals
Human Animal
More porous cortical bone Less porous cortical bone
1/4 thickness of diameter of long bone 1/2 thickness of diameter of long bone
Diaphyseal trabecula present Diaphyseal trabecula absent
Thick diploe in cranial vault bones More compact cranial vault bones

Fig. 3. Relative thickness of animal and human

diaphyseal cortical bone
 Bone Microstructure (Histology):
The microscopic structure of cortical bone is often diagnostic between
humans and animals, although not practical in a field setting.

Osteons (Osteons are several millimetres long and about 0.2 millimetre
(0.008 inch) in diameter; they tend to run parallel to the long axis of a
bone. Osteonsare formations characteristic of mature bone and take shape
during the process of bone remodeling, or renewal.) in human cortical bone
are scattered and evenly spaced whereas in many animals osteons tend to
align in rows (osteon banding) or form rectanguloid structures (plexiform
bone).

Although osteon banding or plexiform bone indicate animal bone, Ubelaker

(1999) cautions that considerable variety exists between species and
between bones of the same animal which therefore makes the
identification of scattered osteon distribution inconclusive.
 Distinguishing Humans from other
Mammals:
Large mammals bones such as deer, large dogs, bear, and pigs are
most frequently mistaken with adult bones, while small animals may
be confused with juvenile or fetal bones.

Especially when bones are highly weathered, eroded, and

fragmented, or when they are subjected to modifying factors such as
burning or warping, identification may only be possible if it is
conducted by a trained osteologist.

For instance, humans and other non-human mammals can be very

analogous in their skeletal components, and since humans are
mammals, they tend to have many of the same skeletal characteristics
such as the number and the type of bones (for example, two femora,
two humeri, two scapulae).
 Distinguishing Humans from other
Mammals:
Additionally, they possess quite similar bone structure such
that most mammals have relatively long bone shafts that are
made up of thick cortical bone and long bone ends that are
made up of trabecular bone.

Indeed, if just a small fragment of bone is recovered without

any morphological indicators, the unique way to identify
whether or not it is human would be through microscopic
examination or DNA analysis.

Upon examination, two main characteristics of bones can

actually help make the difference between human and non-
human bone easy and efficient. These are: maturity and
morphology.
Maturity:
Maturity plays a vital role in differentiating small non-
human animals that, even after reaching adulthood, have
bones that are quite identical in size when compared with
juvenile humans.

For instance, depending upon the level of development,

juvenile human long bones may either have unfused
separate epiphyses or may not possess any at any kind.
 Infant bones:
Infant bones are sufficiently different from adult and even older
children bones that they can cause considerable confusion. With
unformed or unfused epiphyses, singular bones are separated by
ossification segments and have indistinct edges.

Multiple ossification centers and epiphyses increase the number

of bones associated with an infant and many are not identifiable to
a specific bone. Long bone diaphyses are thin and lack the trabecula
of adults.

 Cranial bones are easily disarticulate and lack the diploe

structure and vault bones are the same thickness and very often
confused with turtle or tortoise carapace.
Infant bones:
The petrous portion is separate in infants and, being a
particularly dense bone, it often survives burial better than
others.

Ribs of young infants look very much like those of a small

animal. It can also be very difficult to tell the difference
between a very young animal and a human infant.

Overall, care must be taken when the material appears that

it could possibly be infant bone.
Fig. 4 Comparison of the
different stages of growth
of a human femur,
showing
a) the anterior left femora,
from a newborn without
epiphyses;
b) a child of approx. 3 years
of age with epiphyses;
and
c) an adult who has
completed growth.
On the other hand, those of a small adult non-human animal will
exhibit fused epiphyses, as a result of which , non-human bones can
be easily distinguished from juvenile humans by just examining the
level of bone maturity.

Fig. 5 Pictorial comparison of the anterior view of (a) a right newborn femur, with those
of small adult mammals such as a (b) rabbit; (c) an armadillo; and (d) a raccoon.
The proximal and distal ends of the
juvenile long bones appear quite
rough where the epiphyses will
eventually fuse to the metaphysis.

Furthermore, other morphological

features such as the fusion of the
fibula and tibia, and the curvature
of the long bone shaft (diaphysis)
can be very useful when
distinguishing small animals from
human juvenile long bones.
Fig. 6 Structure and composition of a
typical long bone.
For example, the long
bone shaft of small
mammals may be
distinctly curved while, in
healthy juveniles it tend
to be straight.

Fig. 7 shows the difference in diaphyseal curvature between (a)

a human newborn femur and (b) a raccoon.
Moreover, the pelvis of small mammals is one structure that
can possibly be mistaken with human or fetal bones.

If a small pelvis is fused into one unit, it will be a non-

human pelvis because a human juvenile pelvis of an
equivalent size is yet in multiple pieces and the two adult
pelvic bones of the human do not fuse at all except if there
is a pathological condition.
Fig. 8 Comparison between
(a) a human child pelvis and
that of (b) an adult raccoon.
Although roughly the same
size, the human pelvis
remains unfused in young
children, and the sacrum
always remains as a separate
unit.
 Morphology:
Morphology, or the shape of the
bone, is the second characteristic
of bone that aids in making the
distinction between human and
non-human mammalian bone.

Because humans are bipedal, they

seem to have distinct
morphological features that are
related to walking upright, which
differentiate them from all
quadrupeds that are adapted for
four-legged locomotion.
Fig. 9 shows the quadrupedal mammalian skeletons
(canid: top ; bison: bottom).
 Quadrupeds and Bipeds:
 Much of the difference in long bone anatomy between
animals and humans is the result of pattern of locomotion.

As quadrupeds (expect for birds), animals have dual axes of

orientation and their functional anatomy reflects structures of
locomotion in all four limbs, lacks spinal curvature, has a
long and narrow pelvis, and is additionally reflected in the
posterior position of the foramen magnum and bony
development of posterior of the cranium due to musculature.

Humans on the other hand, as bipeds, have a singular,

central vertical axis of orientation that distributes all of the
individual’s weight through a series of bony mechanisms
designed to soften the impact of bipedal locomotion.
Quadrupeds and Bipeds:
As a result, human crania are centrally placed on the
vertical axis, the spinal column has four slight opposing
curves, the pelvis is broad and short, the femora are
angled, the tibiae have thicker proximal surfaces for
greater weight bearing, the feet have dual arch
structures, and the upper limbs have less pronounced
musculature and a greater range of motion.
When comparing humans and other mammals, the variation in the
shape of long bones and other bones of the body such as the scapula
can be very distinct and can rapidly lead to a positive identification of
human and non-human remains.

Fig. 10 Comparison of mammalian scapulae: (a) pig; (b) sheep; (c) adult human;
and (d) dog. (Not to scale)
For instance, in a number of
small animals, including
mammals, the fibula is quite
reduced in size and is fused to
the shaft of the tibia.

Fig. 11 Comparison between (a) a human newborn tibia and (b) the fused tibia
and fibula of the rabbit.
In humans, the fibula does not usually fuse to the tibia unless
there is a pathology such as ossification of the ligaments that
function in keeping both bones articulated together.

Moreover, some large mammal species (such as the pig, sheep,

and deer) also possess a curved and relatively fused radius and
ulna so as to give more strength and flexibility in weight bearing.

Identification of these two bones instantaneously excludes

humans as both the radius and the ulna have straight diaphysis,
and remain unfused throughout life.
Fig. 12 Curved diaphysis and
fusion of the (a) radius and
(b) ulna in a sheep.
Fig. 13 Comparison of
mammalian ulnae (anterior
view): (a) human; (b) black
bear; (c) mountain lion; (d)
coyote; and (e) pig (ulna and
radius fused together).
Fig. 14 Comparison of
mammalian femora
(posterior view): (a) human;
(b) black bear; (c) horse; (d)
mountain lion; (e) deer; and
(f) coyote.
 Some basic differences in animal and human post-
cranial skeletal anatomy are defined in Table 3 below
Table 4. Differential Skeletal Anatomy of Humans and Animals: Post-cranium
Human Animal
Upper limbs less robust Robust upper limbs
Radius and ulna are separate bones Radius and ulna often fused
Large, flat and broad vertebral bodies with Small vertebral bodies with convex/ concave
short spinous processes surfaces and long spinous processes
Sacrum with 5 fused vertebrae, short and Sacrum with 3 or 4 fused vertebrae, long and
broad narrow
Pelvis is broad and short, bowl-shaped Pelvis is long and narrow, blade-shaped
Femur is longest bone in body, linea aspera is Femur is similar length to other limb bones,
singular feature linea aspera double or plateau
Separate tibia and fibula Tibia and fibula are often fused
Foot is long and narrow, weight borne on
Foot is broad, weight borne mainly on toes
heel and toes
The Metapodials:
Mammals that belong to the order artiodactyl (that is, hoofed
mammals that have an even number of toes on each foot – two
or four) can be easily differentiated from humans by the
presence of metapodials.

In these animals (for example, deer, sheep, goat, moose,

caribou), the third and fourth metacarpals and metatarsals are
joined into one structure early in development, and the common
name for both is metapodial.

Metapodials tend to be significantly long in some species and for

that reason could be without difficulty confused as long bones.
The Metapodials:
Normally metapodials are identified without difficulty
because of a number of morphological indicators – the
shafts are long, thin and straight, and they still maintain a
clear groove down the shaft where they have fused; the
proximal articulation is flat; and the distal articulation is
unique with double rounded articulations.

Additionally, metacarpals and metatarsals can be

characterized from each other by the cross-sectional shape
of their shaft. For instance, metatarsals are squared-shaped
whereas metacarpals are D-shaped in cross-section.
Fig. 15 Examples of
metapodials: (a) sheep
metatarsal and (b) deer
metacarpal. The larger hole
located toward the distal end
of the (a) sheep metatarsal
was drilled postmortem to
assist in removing fat during
the maceration process.
 The Bird Skeleton:
Several differences can aid in distinguishing between a bird
and a human skeleton. Obviously, being the only animal to
have a beak, birds have a very distinctive cranium though they
tend to possess fewer bones than mammals, and that almost
all bird skeletons are quite light in weight simply because they
are adapted for flight.

Such adaptations involve the presence of the furculum, and

the synsacrum, which is the large number of fused vertebrae
that form a solid skeletal connection between the axial
skeleton, the vertebra and the pelvic girdle.

One more distinct feature is that the bodies of the vertebrae

are saddle-shaped.
The Bird
Skeleton:
Fig. 16 Complete articulated
turkey skeleton, with cross-
section of femur shown at
right.
 The Bird Skeleton:
The sternum on many birds, though not all, has a feature called the
carina, which is a keel-like structure to which are attached the
muscles adapted for flight.

The forelimb of a bird is joined together such that there is a

reduction in the number of bones that are located in the carpal,
metacarpal, and phalangeal regions in contrast with mammals.

Besides, the bird skeleton is also exceptional because the lower

limb is composed of three long bone segments. The most proximal
is the femur, followed by the unification of the proximal part of the
tarsus with the tibia, and the distal segment , which is the extended
fusion of foot bones that provide extra leverage for running,
landing, and taking off.
The Bird Skeleton:
The long bones of large birds may be confounded with human
bones, however, the unique morphology of the bird should
prevent it from being misidentified.

The long bones can only be distinguished from human long bones
because they are lighter and have an exterior surface that is
normally smooth apart from the ends, which consist of
articulation surfaces and small muscle attachment sites.

Another exceptional feature of the bird long bone is the definite

structure of the bone. The bird skeleton is light because its long
bones have relatively thin cortical bone and are hollow.
The bird
Skeleton:
Fig. 17 Turkey humerus with
a very smooth cortical
surface, lacking prominent
muscle attachments.
The Bird Skeleton:
Within the long bones are located small spicules, or struts
of bone, that intersect the medullary cavity, thus giving the
bone its structural support like that of an airplane wing. This
feature is distinctive to birds and is not found in any other
animal.
 The Reptilian Skeleton:
Reptiles also
possess many
skeletal
characteristics,
unique to them,
that make them
effortlessly
identifiable.
Reptiles consist
of animals such
as the turtles,
lizards, snakes,
and alligators.

Fig. 18 Representations of reptilian skeletons: (a) cobra

skull and (b) turtle.
 The Reptilian Skeleton:
In contrast with mammals that have a flat body surfaces, reptiles
possess a ball and socket type joint articulation between their
vertebrae, with the cranial side of the vertebra being concave, and the
caudal disc being convex.

Fig. 19 Alligator vertebrae (c) can be confused with vertebrae from other large
mammals such as (a) deer and (b) humans. The concave inferior surface is indicated by
an arrow.
 The Reptilian Skeleton:
The lower jaw of a reptile is composed of several bones. In addition,
the jaws of reptiles have peg-like teeth that are all of the same type.
This type of dentition is referred to as homodont dentition.

This is related to their feeding habit, as reptiles do not chew their

food but instead bite, tear, and swallow food.

Fig. 20 An example of homodont reptilian dentition from a lizard.

The Reptilian Skeleton:
A number of morphological indicators of reptile long bones
can be beneficial when distinguishing them from human
long bones. Specifically, alligator bones could cause some
misunderstanding in contrast with humans, as alligator
bones can be quite large.

Still, the long bones of alligator should be without difficulty

differentiated from the long bones of human. Taken as a
whole, reptile long bones can categorized as being relatively
heavy in contrast with other animals, and they are not
transparent.
The Reptilian Skeleton:
Reptile long bones have thick cortical bone, with a tiny
medullary cavity, and do not have epiphyses. Additionally,
reptile bones such as those from an alligator do not have
the roughened and protruding muscle attachment sites that
are on human bones.
The Reptilian
Skeleton:
Fig. 21 Anterior (a) and
posterior (b) views of an
alligator femur showing the
smooth cortical surface, lack
of prominent muscle
attachment sites, and lack of
defined epiphyses.
The Amphibian Skeleton:
Amphibians are composed of animals such as the frogs,
toads, and salamanders. Their bones are quite very light and
relatively few in number.

A great variation exists among the amphibian species such

as the thickness of the cortical bone, and whether or not
their long bones have medullary cavities.

One constant feature is that the bones of the amphibians

lack epiphyses. Some species however do have
cartilagenous ends to their bones, and once decomposed
the bones can exist only as hollow tubes.
 The Amphibian Skeleton:
So far, there should not be any confusion between amphibian
and human bone as amphibians are normally small, and
consist of a very distinctive skeletal morphology.

Fig. 22 Amphibian (frog) skeleton.

The Fish Skeleton:
Identifying the fish bones from other animals should not be
very difficult, as the fish morphology is quite very dissimilar.
In contrast with the mammalian skeleton, fish tend to have
very fewer bones, and because they are acclimatized to
aquatic environments, all the bones display an adaptation to
swimming.

For instance, the skeletal elements of the fish lack the

cancellous bone, nor do they have medullary cavities
(spaces). They also lack epiphyses, and they are frequently
described as being transparent or semitransparent.
The Fish
Skeleton:
Fig . 23 shows the fish
skeleton.
Non-Human Animal Bones:
There are numerous non-human animals that possess bony
structures or features that look similar to human skeletal
material. However, there are some bones that are more
commonly misidentified.

Animal bones that might be mistaken include the bones of a

bear paw, pig teeth, the knee of a pig, and a turtle shell.

For instance, disarticulated bear paws are usually mistaken

with human hands. After a hunted bear has been killed, the
claws are normally removed as a trophy and the paws are
often abandoned after they are skinned.
Non-Human
Animal Bones:
Fig. 24 Human hand bones
(a) compared with those of a
bear (b).
Non-Human Animal Bones:
There is a prominent resemblance between a bear paw and
a human hand after decomposition of the soft tissue has
started.

The bear paw can be identified without any difficulty by

examining the individual bones, and it can also be easily
distinguished from a human hand without cleaning the soft
tissue from the bone. For example, a radiograph can be
used to differentiate the bear paw from the human hand
since the morphology of the human hand bones is
undoubtedly different.
 Non-Human Animal Bones:
Pig molar teeth also display a significant resemblance to human
molars because pigs are omnivorous like humans and their teeth are
designed for a generalized diet. However, pig molars are relatively
larger in size than the human molars and tend to have pointed cusps.

Fig. 25 Comparison of a (a) human lower molar with that of (b) an unworn pig molar, and (c)
a worn pig molar.
 Non-Human Animal Bones:
In addition, the proximal part of the pig tibia, called the tibial
plateau, can be easily misidentified as a human tibial plateau
by an inexperienced osteologist as they tend to share a similar
morphology.

The tibial plateau of a butchered pig knee or an unfused

proximal tibial epiphysis may be easily identified when a
portion of the proximal pig is also available for examination.

However, if only the very top of the tibial plateau is available

without the shaft of the tibia, it can be very hard to distinguish
from a human tibia. On the other hand, the tibial plateau of
the deer is easily distinguished from the human knee because
of the remarkably distinct morphology.
Non-Human
Animal Bones:
Fig. 26 Comparison of a (a)
human tibial plateau with
that of (b) a pig, and (c) deer.
 Non-Human Animal Bones:
When the exterior layer of the turtle shell, which are composed of
pieces called scutes, comes off, the underlying shell may look like the
top of a human skull. This is particularly true if only part of the top of
the shell is visible through the soil and has been bleached from sun
exposure.

Fig. 27 Turtle shell with an arrow indicating the remaining outer cover, referred to as a scute.
Non-Human Animal Bones:
Similarly, fragments of shell from archaeological contexts
can be confused without difficulty for fragments of human
cranial bone because the flat shape and thickness is
analogous to human cranial vault fragments.

If there is any diagnostic characteristics on the exterior

surface of the turtle shell fragment, then the cross-sectional
morphology of the shell can be used to distinguish it from
the sole cross-section of human cranial bones, which are
made up of diploe, or cancellous bone.
Non-Human
Animal Bones:
Fig. 28 Comparison between
(a) a turtle shell fragment
and (b) a human cranial
fragment; both from
archaeological contexts.
 Table 5.
Comparison of Structural and
Morphological Skeletal
Differences between Human and
Non-Human Animals
Animal Relative Transparen Bone Cortical Medullary Epiphyses
Weight cy Surface Bone Cavity
Morpho-
logy
Humans Heavy Not Well Thick Small Distinguish
transparent developed ed

Mammals Heavy Not Well Thick Small Distinguish

transparent developed ed

Birds Light Not Well Thin Large Some

transparent developed species

Fish Light Transparent Moderately Non- Absent Absent

or semi- developed cancellous
transparent
Amphi- Light Not Poorly Varies Varies Absent
bians transparent developed

Reptiles Moderately Not Almost Moderately Reduced or Varies

heavy transparent absent thick absent
References:
1. Distinguishing between human and non-human bones:
histometric method for forensic anthropology, Petra Urbanová,
Vladimír Novotný - [ 8th August 2014]
2. http://www.statemuseum.arizona.edu/crservices/human_animal_b
one.shtml [13th August 2014]
3. Forensic Recovery of Human Remains – Archaeological Approach
– by Tosha L. Dupras, John J. Schultz, Sandra M. Wheeler, Lana J.
Williams.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION!