Table 1: Values derived from comparisons amongst 12 samples on 8 non-metrical dental traits.
The samples are: S1. Amur, S2. Mongolia, S3. Jiangzhai, S4. Anyang, S5. Northeast Siberia, S6. Lake Baikal, S7. Recent Japan, S8. South China, S9. Hong Kong, S10. Recent Thailand, S11. Jomon, S12. Ainu Hokkaido (see Turner 1987, 1990).
The figures above the diagonal are MMD derived from Anscombe formula calculation of theta. Non-significant values are printed in bold. The figures below the diagonal represent an approximation of sample size. Each figure is the sum of the mean number of teeth which could be observed for the eight traits for each of the pairs of dental samples.
S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | S6 | S7 | S8 | S9 | S10 | S11 | S12 | |
S1 | 0.0598 | 0.0668 | 0.1441 | 0.0323 | 0.1337 | 0.1211 | 0.1458 | 0.1977 | 0.3129 | 0.6329 | 0.2662 | |
S2 | 147 | 0.0335 | 0.0391 | 0.0872 | 0.0426 | 0.0549 | 0.0767 | 0.1043 | 0.2732 | 0.6327 | 0.2995 | |
S3 | 78 | 103 | 0.1364 | 0.1706 | 0.0482 | 0.1379 | 0.1324 | 0.1033 | 0.2726 | 0.6549 | 0.2259 | |
S4 | 201 | 226 | 158 | 0.13 | 0.1662 | 0.1767 | 0.1366 | 0.2341 | 0.3916 | 0.8798 | 0.522 | |
S5 | 201 | 226 | 157 | 281 | 0.1442 | 0.0934 | 0.1004 | 0.1808 | 0.1863 | 0.4805 | 0.2194 | |
S6 | 82 | 107 | 38 | 162 | 161 | 0.1237 | 0.0633 | 0.103 | 0.2415 | 0.4496 | 0.2264 | |
S7 | 450 | 475 | 406 | 530 | 529 | 410 | 0.0188 | 0.0232 | 0.1255 | 0.4057 | 0.1313 | |
S8 | 139 | 164 | 9S | 219 | 219 | 99 | 467 | 0.0059 | 0.1016 | 0.4082 | 0.1416 | |
S9 | 269 | 294 | 225 | 349 | 348 | 229 | 597 | 286 | 0.1088 | 0.388 | 0.1032 | |
S10 | 212 | 237 | 168 | 292 | 291 | 172 | 540 | 229 | 359 | 0.1182 | 0.0446 | |
S11 | 298 | 323 | 254 | 378 | 377 | 258 | 626 | 315 | 445 | 388 | 0.1435 | |
S12 | 147 | 172 | 103 | 226 | 226 | 107 | 475 | 164 | 294 | 237 | 323 |