the hypotrochanteric fossa

SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS

VOLUME

92.

NUMBER

1

THE HYPOTROCHANTERIC _FOSSA OF THE FEMUR

(With 14 Plates)

BY ALES HRDLICKA

Curator, Division of PhysicalAnthropology, U.S. NationalMuseum

m

^SV

(Publication 3250)

CITY

OF WASHINGTON

PUBLISHED

BY THE SMITHSONIAN

INSTITUTION

AUGUST

4, 1934

Zi>i£orb(§aiiimon (pnee

BALTIMORE,MT., C.S. A.

THE HYPOTROCHANTERIC FOSSA OF THE FEMUR

By ales HRDLICKA

Curator, Division of Physical Anthropology, U.S. National

Museum (With

14 Plates)

CONTENTS

PAGE

Earlier data on the fossa i

Summary

of observations from the literature 13

New

observations on the fossa 16

The fossa in lemurs 17

The fossa in

New

World monkeys 17

The fossa in Old World monkeys ¹⁸

The fossa in anthropoid apes ^IQ

Summary

of observations on anthropoid apes 22

The fossa in early

man

²³

The fossa in later and modern

man

2;^

Thefossabefore andabout timeof birth 24

The fossa in children, adolescents, and subadults 26

U.S. Whites 27

U.S. Negroes 27

XII Dynasty Egyptians 28

Prehistoric Peruvians 28

North i\merican Indians 29

The Eskimo 30

Sex and ^side in juvenile bones 32

The fossa in adults 32

The fossa and platymery 35

Adolescents compared with adults 36

Differences in adults in the two^sexes 40

Differences in adults as to side 41

The fossa inthe aged ₄₃

Size of the fossa 44

Life history of the fossa 45

The fossa in lower

mammals

₄₅

Summary

₄₆

EARLIER DATA ON THE FOSSA

Under

the

name

of ^" la fosse hypotrochanterienne^",

Emile Houze^

in 1883 described a hollow located in the superior posterior

and

ex-

^Houze,E., Sur la presence du troisiemetrochanter chez I'homme. Bull. Soc.

Anthrop. Bruxelles, vol.2, pp. 21-52, 1883-84.

Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 92, No. ¹

2

SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS

^VOL. 92 ternal part of the femoral cliaphysis

and

running parallel to the long axis of the same.'

The

borders of this hollow, as well as the

rough

surface of its floor, served, he thought, for the attachment of the terminal fibersof the greatgluteal muscle.^

The

fossa,hesaid further,

may

exist alone or be associated with a third trochanter.

He

found

it tobe ^"a constant character^" of the

femora

of the upper paleolithic of Furfooz, Belgium, and frequent inthose of similar ageof France

;

but it

was

less frequent in the neolithic age,

and

" positively rare in

pronounced form

ⁱⁿ

modern man."

^*

The

data of

Houze

(imperfectly

summed up

later

by

Pearson and BelP),

were

as follows:

With Femora hypotroclianteric

examined fossa

(341) Percent

Early

man

^: Furfooz 20 100.-

Grenelle 21 57.-

Cro-Magnon 2 (100)

Madeleine i (100)

Neolithic of Belgium and France

no

44.-

Merovingian ₃₀ 23.-

Modern, Bruxelles 67 10.5

Modern, Bruxelles: 10 male 10

10 female 10

Canary Islanders 16 18.7

Asiatic, miscellaneous 11 {18.-)

African Negro 18 6.-

South American Indian 5

Oceanians and Australian ₅ {20.-)

From

this evidence

Houze

concluded that the fossa

was

materially

more

frequent in earlier

man and

diminished in frequency of occur- rence toward the present;

and

he

was

further of the opinion that

" the fossa enlarged considerably the transverse diameter of the diaphysis,

and

that the enlargement

was

realized at the expense of the antero-posterior diameter^"

—

^{in other} words, that it increased the

^"Une cavite creusee dans le sens de ^I'axe diaphysaire et situee a la partie superieure, posterieure et externede la diaphyse, . . . ."

Les bords de la fosse hypotrochanterienne servent, ainsi que la surface rugueuse de son fond, aux fibres terminales du grand fessier." (P. _41.)

^"La fosse hypotrochanterienne est un caractere constant de tons les femurs de I'age du Reneen Belgique^; ce caractere relie les Troglodytes deFurfooz aux

homme

de Grenelle, qui leur sont deja apparentes par le crane, la taille et la perforation olecranienne

"La fosse hypotrochanterienne tres accusee, mais moins frequente a I'age de la pierre polie, devient positivement rare a I'epoque moderne." (P. _43.)

'Pearson, K., and Bell, _J.,

A

study ofthe long bones of the English skeleton.

Part I, Thefemur. Drapers' Co. Research Mem., biometric ser., vol. 10, p. 68.

London, 1919.

NO. I

THE HYPOTROCHANTERIC

FOSSA

HRDLICKA

₃

flattening,or,as it

was

called later,theplatymery, of theproximal por- tion of the shaft.

In 1886

Von

^Torok,in a study devoted

more

especially to the third trochanter, reported that he

had found

a hypotrochanteric fossa in 23 ^of 76 (30.2 percent)

male femora

of

Hungary

ranging

from

bronze-ageto recent, but in only 2 of 32 (6.2 percent) female bones of the

same

derivation.

He

regarded the fossa as one of the three structural variants

—

^{the other}

^two

^{being the gluteal ridge}

^and

^the

third trochanter

—

serving for theattachmentof the gluteus

maximus

;

"

and

he believed it

would

show, as did the third trochanter, con- siderable differences in different

human

groups.

In 1889^' Testut reports the presenceof thehypotrochanteric fossa in the Chancelade

femur and

^{recalls that the fossa existed also in} one of the

Cro-Magnon femora and

in one of Madeleine.

There

is

no

discussion, but the following quotation

shows

that in Testut's opinion the fossa in the Chancelade

femur

served for the insertion of apowerfulgluteus

maximus

^: " veritablefossehypotro chanterienne

(Houze)

dont le fond, herisse de rugosites, donnait insertion a

un grand

fessier certainement plus developpe que dans nos races modernes."

In 1890 the hypotrochanteric fossa received further consideration

by

the Italian author Costa.'

He

regarded the fossa together with the third trochanter

and

the gluteal ridge, as abnormalities of regres- sive or atavistic nature, as signs of inferiority,"

and

as features that might

throw

^light

on human

phylogeny.

*"Das sind nun die drei Ansatzformen des grossen Gesassmuskels." Anat.

Anz. Centralbl., Jahrg. i, no.6, p. 177,Aug. 15, 1886.

^Testut, L., Recherches anthropologiques sur le squelette quaternaire de Chancelade (Dordogne). Bull. Soc. Anthrop. Lyon, vol. 8, pp. 202-203, 1889.

**Costa, Pietro, II terzo trocantere, la fossa ipotrocanterica, la cresta ipotro- canterica nel femore dell'Uomo. Arch. Antrop. Etnol., Firenze, vol. 20, pp.

269-304. 1890.

""Evidentemente dunque ^il terzotrocantere e con lui la fossa ipotrocanterica

e la cresta, sono caratteri di inferiorita, e il trovarli nel femore deU'uomo modernonone altro cheunindiziodi regresso,di ritorno all'antico." (P. 297.)

"QuestI i resultati, che c'indicano come assuma il terzo trocantere nei crimi- nali talora proporzioni esagerate: e questo fatto mi sembra sia sempre piu in appoggio sul considerare il terzo trocantere e naturalmente con lui la fossa ela crestache spesso vi s'associano, come segni di regresso, di inferiorita, come

signi di atavismo." (P. _299.)

"Dunque il terzo trocantere, la fossa ipotrocanterica e la cresta sottotro- canterica sono disposizionianormali del femore, e desse percio cometutteledis- posizioni anormali che appaiono sporadicamente come ricordi del passato, sono (dice Duchenne) altrettanti materiali che possono essereutilizzati per servire a stabilire leorigini antiche delgruppo umano." (P. 300.)

4 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS

^{VOL. <)2} Costa's observations

on

the frequency of the fossa

were

as follows

:

With Femora hypotrochanteric

examined fossa Percent

Europeans 102 30 2^.4

Asiatics 6 4 ^{(>^-7}

Africans 12 6 50.0

Australians 2 I ^..••

Americans (probably Indians).... 14

n

7B.6

Fuegians Z7 2>7 100.-

A

year after (1891) Bertaux,'" in his thesis

on

the

humerus and

the femur, gives also attention to the hypotrochanteric ^fossa.

By

this

name,

he says (p. 159), ^is designated

"an

elliptic hollow that occasionallyappears onthe

human femur

andislocatedonthe superior posterior

and

external part of the diaphysis. This fossa gives inser- tion to the gluteus

maximus The

frequency of this skeletal featureisvery variable"."

He

finds itonce only in

47

^"determined

"

French

femora; in

38

percent of the

Guanches

^{; in} the

same

propor- tion in the

Orrouy

femora; in 3 out of 34 ^{(8.8 percent)}

femora

of divers Negroes; twice in four Californians;

and

ⁱⁿ 23 ^percent of the anthropoids examined.

Bertaux

is the first to observe the fossa in the anthropoid apes.

He

suggests that it

may

^{present racial}

differences, but ^his data

on

the anthropoid as well as

on

the

human

material,

owing

to lack of clearness as to just

what

the proportions apply to

(femora

or skeletons), are unsatisfactory.

The same

year (1891)

Hyades

and Deniker"^ reporthaving found the fossa, alone or in association with a third trochanter, in 13 out of 29

Fuegian femora

(44.8 percent). In general, the fossa

was

less

marked

than the tuberosity.

They

^{illustrate both the fossa}

^and

^the

third trochanter onthe

femur

of a Fuegiangirl of eight.

They

^{do not}

discuss the

meaning

of the fossa.

Manouvrier" and Ludewig,

^{in their studies on the} femur, both touched

more

or less

on

^the subtrochanteric fossa but

added no

'"

Bertaux, ^A., L'humefus et le femur consideres dans les especes. dans les races humaines, selon le sexe et selon I'age, Paris, Lille, 1891.

""Sousle

nom

defossehypotrochanterienne, ondesigneunefossette elliptique qui sepresente exceptionellement sur le femur de I'homme et siege a la partie superieure, posterieureet externe de la diaphyse. Cettefossedonne insertion au muscle grand fessier

"La

frequence de ce caractere squelettique est tres variable." (P. 159.) '^Hyades, P., and Deniker, _J., Mission scientifique du Cap Horn, 1882-1883, vol. 7. Anthropologic, Ethnographic, Paris, 1891.

'"

Alanouvrier, L., La platymerie. loth Sess. Cong. Intern. Anthrop. and Archeol. prehist., [1889] pp. 363-81, 1891; Etude sur les variations morpho-

NO. 1

THE HYPOTROCHANTERIC

^{FOSSA IIRDLICKA} 5 original data. Ludevvig,"

who

failed to lindit

on

the

femora

ofhis

own

preparations, uses the

term

^" suhtrochanteric^" for hypotrochariteric,

which

forthe sake of

euphony would seem

preferable.

In 1893

Rudolf Martin

^" reported the presence of the hypotro- chanteric fossa in all his five Alakalauf (Fuegian)

femora and

ex- presses, doubtless after

Houze,

the opinion that the hollow stands in a causative relation to the lateral protrusion

and

the flattening of the upperpart of the shaft.

In 1894 appeared ^a noteworthy study of the

femur by

Evangeli-

Tramond." He

reported^findingthehypotrochanteric fossa "in nearly

alltheneolithic

femora

of the Crois des Cosaques, Nanteuil-le-Harduin

and

Copierres-sur-Ept^".

He was

thefirsttoreport the feature accord- ing to its grades. In 120

modern French

bones of

known

sex it

was

represented thus

:

60male 60female

femora, femora,

percent percent

Fossa: very plain (2) 3.3 ⁽ⁱ⁾ 1.7

fairly plain (6) 10.- ₍₇₎ ii-7

trace (21) 35-- (14)23.3

All (29) 48.3 (22) 36.7

Evangeli-Tramond was

also the first to observe that the fossa ^"is

better defined in femora, the epiphyses of

which

are

formed

but not yet attached, than inthose of adults ^". This statement

was

quoted in subsequenteditionsof Testut's ^"Traite

d'Anatomie

^"

and was

^noticed also

by

Klaatsch (q, v.), but undeservedly has ^received

no

^further

attention.

The

original observation on this point reads thus _(pp.

55-56) ^:

To

the present we have noted the existence of the hypotrochanteric fossa in only the femora of the adults. However, since our examination of the pre- historic femora we have been struck by the fact that the fossa appeared more or less clearly according to the age of the subjects. Sufficiently well marked and relatively frequent on young femora with their epiphyses still cartilaginous,

it became the more accentuated the nearer the bones approached the age of adolescence,whentheepiphyses werealreadyformed but notyet attached,while

itbecame scarcerand aboveall less well definedinagedfemora.

This evolution appeared interesting to

me

and I wished to compare it with that of modern femora. Having at

my

disposition a large number of skeletons logiques du corps du femur dans I'espece humaine. Bull. Soc. Anthrop. Paris, vol. _4, pp. 111-114, 1893.

" Ludewig, W., Monographic des menschlichen Oberschenkelbeins. Inaug.- Diss., pp. 17, 18. Berlin, 1893.

"_{Martin, R.,}Zur physischen Anthropologic der Feuerlander. Arch. Anthrop., vol. 22, p. 195, 1894.

^'Evangeli-Tramond, A., Quelques particularites sur le femur. Paris, 1894.

6

SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS

^VOL. 92

ofall ages,Idividedthem intothree groups, considering inthefirstthe skeletons offetuses, in the secondinfants, in the third adolescents. ^I encountered ^it [the fossa] only exceptionally in thefirsttwogroups, while in the third group, com- prising 18 femurs with epiphyses not attached, but well formed, I found ^{it 12} times perfectly clear, deep, well defined, and4 times ^{less well} marked. Intwo femorathere were only traces of the fossa. ^I cannot^state herethe percentages, as the number of femora examined is toosmall, but this frequency is very sig- nificant and permits the consideration of this fossa as best developed about ^the agesof 18 to20years.

Evangeli-Tramond made

^further interesting original observations

on

the fossa,

which

also remained

unknown

to, orhave been forgotten by, subsequent ^authors.

He

^{described its different forms at differ-}

entages.

A mere

finely grained although quite distinct impression in infancy, it deepens and assumes ^elliptical

form

as age advances. In adolescence,

when

^{fully developed, it}

may

^reach

4

^to 5 centimeters in length, ⁱ centimeter in breadth,

and

several millimeters ⁱⁿ depth.

Later on, after the epiphyses have

become

attached, in

some

of the

femora

he

saw

developed within the fossa

bony

tubercles,

which

eventually

would

occupytheinternal half of the depression; butsome- times the fossa disappeared entirely as a result of invasion by these rugosities.

Curious as to

how

the fossa

was

formed,

Evangeli-Tramond

dis- sected six subjects. In three of these (the remainder

were

without the fossa) he

was

able to ascertainthat the gluteus

maximus

^inserted

only in the gluteal ridge,

and

that the external border of the fossa with the adjoining

smooth

part of the bone gave insertion to fleshy fibers of the vastus externus

—

^{the fossa being}

^found

^{between the}

two.

Where

the gluteus is not voluminous the fossa remains well defined^;

when

the gluteus islarge, however,its insertion willencroach

on

the fossa and

may

even invade this entirely, so that between the tendonof this muscle andthe fibers of the vastus therewill no longer be any space or any depression.'"

""Comment

^se forme cette fossette? J'ai disseque six sujets afin de voir quels rapports avaient entre elles les parties charnues et les surfaces osseuses.

Trois de ces sujets ne m'ont rien revele, car aucund'eux ne presentait trace de goutticre. Sur les trois autres cependant j'ai constate que sur la ligne des rugosites, etseulementsurelle,s'inserait le gros tendondumusclegrandfessier, que sur la,partie moyenne ^lisse, et la levre qui constitue le bord externe de la fosse,s'inseraient des fibres charnuesallant auvaste externe.

"C'est entre ces deux chefs d'insertion tendineux etcharnus que setrouve la fossette hypotrochanterienne. Si le tendondu musclegrandfessier est peuvolu- mineux, et si la levre externe est tres saillante, la depression restera tres nette. Si le muscle grand fessier est surmene, son insertion empietera sur le lerritoire de la fossette et pourra

meme

I'envahir tout entier, si bien qu'entre

NO. I

THE HVPOTROCHANTERIC

FOSSA

HRDLICKA

₇ This led

Evangeli-Tramond

to the conchision that the fossa

was

prohahly due to an excess of muscular activity at that locality.

This talented

worker

also gave attention to the possihle connection of the fossa with platymery

and

arrived at the conclusion that even

if the

two

characters ^"are in

no way

dependent, at least the

more

or less accentuated platymery permits the hypotrochanteric fossa to

become

developed proportionately^".

In 1895

Lehmann-Nitsche,

in his

well-known work on

the long bones

from

the row-graves of Bavaria/' althoughnot occupying him- selfespeciallywith thefossa,

found

itin frequent (80^{to 88.2}percent) association with the subtrochanteric lip

and was

inclined to regard

it as standing in a causative relation to the lateral protrusion

and

the flattening of the subtrochanteric region.

Of

62

femora

of his

Swabians and Alemans

the fossa

was

present in 23 (37.1 percent).

In accordance with the views of previous authors he regarded the fossa, the third trochanter,

and

the gluteal ridge as merely " die einzelnen

Formen

des Insertionsstelle " of the gluteus

maximus

(P-4i)-

Another

study

on

the

human and

also the anthropoid femur, in

which

thehypotrochanteric fossais considered,

was

published in 1899

by

Bumiiller."

Of ₄₀₇ modern and presumably German

femora, he

found

the fossa alone orincombination withthegluteal ridge or third trochanter, in 200, or 49.1 percent.

Bumiiller, however,

no

longer regarded the fossa as merely one of the

bony

variants

formed by

or for the insertion of the gluteus

maximus

; it "

was

unjustly attributed hitherto to the gluteus^" (p.

54).

The

action of this muscle is not conducive to the formation of such a hollow. It cannot be

assumed

that the

same

muscle,

on

the

same

bone,

would

possess

two

such wholly different

forms

of

bony

formation for its insertion as the ridge

and

the fossa.

With

such an assumption, moreover, it

would

be hard to understand

why

the

les fibres charnues du vaste externe et le tendon du grand fessier il n'y aura plus d'intervalle, partant plus defossette." (Pp. 57, 58.)

I

may

state, in this connection, that as Evangeli-Tramond's thesis was not found in libraries inWashington, it did not become accessibleto

me

^until after the present work and even the manuscript were completed^; so that all the results tobe found inthis memoir were arrivedat independently.

"Lehmann-Nitsche, R.,Beitrage zur physischen Anthropologic der Bajuvaren:

III.Untersuchungen iiberdielangenKnochen der siidbayerischen Reihengraber- bevolkerung. Beitr.Anthrop. Urgesch. Bayerns, Miuichen,vol. 11, nos. 3 and _4, 1894-95.

"*Bumiiller, _J., Das menschliche Femur nebst Beitriigen zur Kenntnis der

Affenfemora. Munich (Inaug.-Diss.), _1899.

8

SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS

^VOL. 92 fossa is always located laterally to, or at

most

underneath, the gluteal ridge, butnevermesially orsuperiorly.

Bumiiller attributed the fossatotheinsertionof the vastus^lateralis

;

and he held, asdid

Houze,

that there

was

a direct connectionbetween the fossa and platymery.^

An

especially interesting study on the

femur

in

which

the hypo- trochanteric fossa receives attention appeared in 1900 in Paul-Bon-

-"

It will be^useful, I think, tocitehis exact words in these connections.

"Ich habe schon oben gezeigt, dass crista und fossa vielfachmit Platymerie zusammenhangen, indem bei letzterer die laterale Flache verkleinert wird.

Dieselbe Bedeutung wie diese Verkleinerung hat eine relativ sehr machtige Muskelentwickelung. In beiden Fallen muss ^{die zu} geringe Ansatzflache ver- grossert werden. Dies geschieht durch fossa und crista, besonders ausgiebig durch eine Kombination von fossa und crista Hiedurch kann fast eine doppelte Vergrosserung der lateralen Flache eintreten. Dabei ist aber meines Erachtens nicht nur der M. glutaeus maximum, sondern auch der M. vastus lateralis beteiligtund zwar in folgender Weise. Der Glutaeus zieht sozu sagen die crista aus der Diaphyse heraus und kann so eine machtige Ansatzstelle erzielen. Der M. vastus lateralis macht sich entweder die durch den Glutaeus geschaffene Vergrosserung zu Nutzen, er partizipiert an der cristaoder er ruft neben der crista eine rauhe, mit Hockerchen besetzte, gewohnlich teilweise etwas ^vertiefte Ansatzstelle hervor oder er grabt sich endlich neben der ^crista in die Diaphyse ein (fossa). Diese fossa wurde wohl mit Unrecht bisher auf den Glutaeus bezogen. Allein es ist doch nicht anzunehmen, dass eine und derselbe Muskel an demselben femur und an ^{derselben Stelle} zwei ganz ver- schiedene Ansatzweisen besitzt. Es ware bei dieser

Annahme

auch schwer verstandlich,

warum

die fossa immer auf der lateralen Seite der crista oder hochstens unterhalb dercrista sich befindet,niemals aber auf der medialen Seite.

Dieses Verhalten entspricht dagegen ganz der Thatsache, dass der Vastus

lateralis ausserhalb des Glutaeus ^inseriert. Manchmal ist die fossa unterhalb der- crista und diese selbst nimmt nach oben hin zu.

Warum

^ist, wenn beide Erscheinungen dem Glutaeus ihren Ursprung verdanken, die Aufeinanderfolge nie umgekehrt, die fossa oben und die crista unten? Bei Beriicksichtigung des vastus lateralis erklart sich dieses Verhalten. Infolge grossen Raummangels (oder individueller Variation?) riicken die Ansatzstellen der Muskeln, die neben einander keinen Platz haben, in eine Linie. Der Glutaeus wird seiner Zugrichtung entsprechend etwas nach oben ^geriickt, der Vastus lateralis, der in entgegengesetzter Weise zur Kniescheibe verlauft, eben dieser Zugrichtung entsprechend nachunten. Deshalb kann niemals die fossa oben, die crista unten sein. Endlich erscheint es geradezu unmoglich, dass der Glutaeus eine fossa hervorbringt. Seine Hauptwirkung auf das femur besteht darin, dass er das gebeugte Bein in die senkrechte Stellung zuriickzubringen hat. Dabei hat er die Tendenz, die Diaphyse nach hinten herauszuziehen. Die fossa aber ware eine dieser Tendenz gcrade entgegengesetzter Effekt und deshalb unerklarlich."

(P. 54-)

NO. I

THE HVPOTROCHANTERIC

FOSSA

HRDLICKA ₉

cour's ^"Skeletal Modifications Following

Hemiplegia

^".''

The

fossa

is

more

frequent

on

the affected side,

and when

bilateral, is both larger

and

deeper in the affected

bone

(p. 50).

The

fossa stands in close relation to the different

forms

^of platymery. Its greater frequency

and

development on the diseased side are due to lesser development of the crural muscle

and

to structural differences in the affected bone. " _{It is} consequently possible to suppose that at a given time a subject

may

possess a fossa, that is to say a free space

between

the gluteal ridge

and

the external border of the surface of insertion of the [crural] muscle;

and

that through the enlarge-

ment

of the latter,caused

by

conditions of life oractivity, this surface [the fossa] diminishes or disappears ^" (p. 51).

And

^further (p. 57) ^:

"

The

significance of the hypotrochanteric fossa varies according to the

form

of platymery

which

it accompanies. In certain cases it

denotes accentuated platymery, while in others it is in relation to a smallermuscular development. Its diminution

and

its disappearance in certain

femora would

indicate, therefore, a proportionate increase in

muscular

activity."

^^

Shortly afterward (1900-1), Klaatsch published a valuable paper

on

^"

The Most

Important Variations of the Skeletal Parts of the

Lower Limbs

","^ in

which

he also deals briefly with the hypotro- chanteric fossa (pp. 633-635),

There

are

no new

statistical data

and no

original study of the fossa, but the author has observed the hollow, well developed, in the

femora

of Neanderthal

and

Spy,

which

(together with Boncour's

and Evangeli-Tramond's

observations)

"opens the possibility of conceiving the feature as an old character

which

ontogenetically or, better, during the

growth

period of recent

man,

can still transitionally

make

^its appearance^".

And

Klaatsch is

further of theopinion thatthe locationof the fossaⁱⁿ the Neanderthal

and Spy femora

is such that a genetic connection of the

same

with

^^Paul-Boncour, G., fitude des modifications squelettiques consecutives a rhemiplegie. I. Le Femur. Bull. Soc. Anthrop. Paris, ser. 5,vol. i, 1900.

""La signification de la fosscfte liypotrochantcrienne varie suivant la forme de platymerie qu'elle accompagne. Dans certains caselle denote une platymerie accentuee, dans d'autres au contraire elle est en relation avec un moindre de- veloppement musculaire. Sa diminution et sa disparition sur certains femurs indiqueraient done un accroissement proportionnel de Tactivite musculaire."

(P. 57.)

"_{Klaatsch, H., Die} wichtigsten Variationen

am

Skelet der freien unteren Extremitat. Ergebnisse Anat. u. Entwickelungsgeschichte, ^{vol. 10,} pp. 599-719.

1900-1.

H>

SNmHSv^MVN

M»SvII I

AM

^{vM'S i}

OM

^>A lU^NS VV>L,

9^

(Ih* sul'i\v^luulruv" l.itiM.il o\p.\HM»M» v>l [\w shall v\M\Uv»t bo luis-

1'\m mo,\>I\ a> vo.us >»itoi tho ai>iH\u.u>vo v>f Klnutsoh's jviivt iho vulM'Vt oi \\\v suU\\K\\i\uW\w ^loss;* vtvoiv<\l »\o

now

ovM\tributuM\s oC impvMiauvv^; 1m>i \\\ >vn«) ;»p|H\\vovl il\o o\tn\s\\T

wvnk

o(

Person

,U»»I Holl VM\ ihoIv^Uji hvM>OS Ol tl\0 lMV}ilish skolot\MU**JUUl this |MYSOI\tS

hM

il\o livst tiiwo svMWO aiuj^lo stalisiios on tl\o loss;\. ivH^rthov with

Vvmsivloiahlo

now

hjilit vn\itswssiviutions,

IVaisvM* .nhl

HoU

thvM^^ht thov hjul s^vn a

woH nuvkod

hyinuiv*

ohanttMio tv\ss;\ n\ a /\K\\\fm.w they huvl not ix\N^ni?v\l it in ^ht^

ji\MiUas thoy oxan\intsK hut "hnU notivTvl itulic^uions of it inthejjib- h\M\, thoo\anjj\anvlthe ohin\\vnuvv^" i^jv \(x*V \t\ hut>u>\n fonu^m they UmuuI ('n> ^\^l^n\M^,^ v^M\vhti\n\s

;

\ ...y V}i«M t*»>

bV<uxMA with t\vw», vSJ^ i^\\>n>> Vv^"^^ UV^"*

lV*\Y»\t with t\v<NA ,n\^,< 4i^4 ,Vx^ \ ^

A^^^'~ ^{'^' -^'}

AU

tV<\\\M^ v^xvx Su^^

lA with <\Vt»*v v»»«>^ lU^O

»V<\T<v» with iKv!**x

aWo

^xt*

wh;U tVnUx

The

N^w; x<v

<\Mi Vx <;vu-nnn o-.^4V>^ V vV Kcvx\va;\

H<w^

hi\>«««rK$*rsxw'^v uv t.v>)vK>^

nn m

^{TvMK^H U AN1I'KU' I'OSSA UKIM 1>.}

^KA

^1I

\\w woll uiaikoir"; II, " vlisliwoUy jMOSoul in drlinuc

tonu

^"" ; and HI. SiMuc (r;uv. sH,i;ht Uouj;h ov lossa ^". The data folUnv:

//v/>.>/r«»<fc«>M/«*riV ^'(l)>^^«J iu the .V.></m<></<> ^Vw»^«^f

1V-t\u\to unlr ^..^S-"^^

-vol

4 oS V4-^

IVrv«iU

28.87

IV.wson aiul Hell j^avo also a

loswmo

ot the availaMo itUovwKuiou

vMi iho |MVSon«,v v>i

\W

tossa \\\oavly

man

t^p. .J5,0 ^:

The /<»v\\\\» ;^.v^'/f.^7^.>M*,-»J.,) ^is well nurki\l in Xc.uulorlhal K.. auvl \s quite

«k(itutcin Xo;uulortl\;»l I. ;uul it\ Spy I ;uul Si\v II. .\coonHi\ji to Uoulc it is

not tontKl in tl»o la ^.'hapolUxuix-Saints tV>»\nr. but appears ^it\ la ^{Forrassie I.}

l.a Fenassie

U

is detective at this iHMUt. lialley Uill has a slight hypvUro- chauteric t\vssa v>n the tnesial side of the ri<>ic prevXHliiv»i the third trochanter.

The /.vwwi also appears in all \ert\eau\s t'einora whether ot Ctvn\;»gnon or NeiJTvml TytH\ //<>«i,> nnmsin-icwsis (.Uauseri^ is deCeetive at this ivMut

W

c

t\»;v,v v\M\clnde ^th.it the /<v\\\\> hyf^otnKh%ii*)^ru\>i is usual in all tyjvs v>l

rmno

iixMiial Man.

lVav.sv>n

and

^r>olI viVv\cni.H\l that tlu^ tluco ^""anoin.ilio.^^". i.e.. tho lossa. tho third ttoohantor,

and

the i;lt>'^"^l rid};i\

"can

^{exist indo-} IxMidontly ^". or that "

wo may

havo in tho satno itivhvidnal a

Awm

hyf>otrochiviiericas\m\\o\\\\u\\hy a crista

hochantmca

Ighttoal ridiio]

which

aniohidos with a woll-niarkovl trochanter tcrtius" \^\>. (^>V Thoro is "no siiittilioant as.sooiativMi hotwoon tho prosonoo ^v>t tho tossa

and

tho third trochatttor^*' {\\

;5V

Vhc t\>s.sa "is nurkodly loss IM'ovalont it\ tlio tomalo than in tho inalo honos^". and in botli soxos

"tho

lott hono pvosiMits tho anoni.ilv

nuMO

frov|not\tlv tlian tho vis;ht

"

riuMo ^" is a stnall hnt jnst sonsihlo cv>nolation Ivtwoon platytnory

.,r,vl tho pto.sotKX' ot tho fossa" t^p. r^)V

No

attotnpt

was

nuulo at an oxplanation of tho ontv\i:xMtosis of tho fv>s,sa.

and

thoro is ni^thitii^ on its aj^x^ ditVoronoos. .\s to its sig- nit\oanoo tho atithors oxpross thotnsolvos tints

yv

5v\0 ^:

Such a character as the IvyiH^trvH-hanttric fvvssa in Recent M.ui exhibits all the siitns of a disappeariivc phenomction InxxMuinji less and less frequent since

12

SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS

VOL. 92

palaeolithic times. Itis morereasonable to suppose it as a vestige ofwhat was once a generic character

—

even as the lateral protrusion of the anterior face in modern

man

is a vestige of a lemuroid generic character

—

than to suggest

itsindependent development in two or even more simio-human lines proceeding froma gibbon-like origin.

As

to the relation of the fossa,

and

the third trochanter, with the gluteus muscle, Pearson

and

Bell speak as follows (p. 68)^:

It is hard to understand how, if they were due to the development of the gluteus maxhmis in man, they should remain anomalous in his case, and the rule in numerous lower types, while their frequent appearance in infants, in

women, and in bones of small muscular development at least precludes the theory that their appearanceis solely dueto use development.

Since Pearson

and

Bell's contribution to the subject there has ap- peared but onenoteworthystudy of the fossa, that ofA. B. Appleton,

"

On

the Hypotrochanteric Fossa and Accessory

Adductor Groove

of the Primate

Femur

"."

Basinghisfindings

on

dissections

made

by himself,Appleton points out the presence of certain fossae in primate

femora

that cannot be identified with the fossa hypotrochanterica of

man,

since they are of a totally different nature. In particular, he says, "a fossa is

present on the

femur

of the gorilla, chimpanzee

and

orang-outan,

named

in this paper the ^' accessory adductor groove^',

which

super- ficially resemblesthe fossa hypotrochanterica of

man. The homologue

of the latter, however, is found in these apes ⁱⁿ another situation, viz. on the outer aspect of the shaft wellbelow the level of thelesser trochanter." In addition he has noted another hollow, located near the middle of the posterior surface of the subtrochanteric region of the shaft, which he calls the " pectineal groove^". Pearson

and

Bell, he points out, have confused the hypotrochanteric fossa

and

the accessory adductor groove in the chimpanzee and orang (footnote 2

on

p. 66 of their

memoir).

Appleton assumesthat "the identityof the fossa hypotrochanterica

is defined for us by

Houze

as the site of insertion of

M.

gluteus ma.vimus

and

^{in this} sense later writers have dealt with it

(Von

Torok, Costa

and

Pearson) ",

and

adds the following in this con- nection (pp. 296-297) ^:

ATTACHMENT OF

M.

GLUTEUS MAXIMUS TO FEMUR

Man: gluteal ridge, 3rd trochanter or jossahypotrochanterica.

Gorilla, Chimpanzee and Orang-outan: a spiral fossa on the lateral aspect of the femoral shaft; thisisthe jossa hypotrochantericaof these animals. It is the largest and mostdistally placed in the Gorilla . . .

^Appleton, A. B.,Journ. Anat.,vol. 56, pp. 296-306, 1922.

NO. I

THE HYPOTROCHANTERIC

FOSSA

HRDLICKA

I3 Cercopithecidae: gluteal ridge, replaced or accompanied occasionally by a

fossa hypotrochantcrxca ...

He

adds that, in a CcrcopitJiccus sab.

and

a Papio

ham.

the fossa takes the

form

of a groove in these

two named

specimens.

A mere

flattening is presentⁱⁿ Nasalislarv.,a sHght groove in Nas. larv. juv.

It sometimes takes the

form

ofa faint pit, with prominent medial lip.

No

fossa

was met

with in

American monkeys and

in Prosimiae.

In his concluding

remarks Appleton

accentuates the fact that

:

in this paper no attempt ^is made at discussing the significance of ridges and of fossae at the site of muscular attachments. Facts established in this paper, however, suggest cautionin the employment of the jossa hypotrochantcrica for the natural classification of Primates The distribution of fossa and of the alternative gluteal ridge (w^hen large, known as a third trochanter) is an argument against this assumption Until more is known of a possible functional significance for the appearance of a fossa at the site of insertion of

M.

glutens maximits, it must be precarious to argue as to the nature of that insertion, whetherfossa orridge,in the

common

^ancestorof Hylobates,theother Simiidae and Man.

The namefossa hypotrochantcrica ^isconveniently reserved forafossa, groove orpit atthesite of insertion ofilf. gluteus maximusonthefemur.

Among

Primates the hypotrochanteric fossa presents considerable variety of situation; an extremecondition is presentedby the large Simiidae.

Barring a

few

incidental mentions of the hypotrochanteric fossa, the above is apparently about all that has been said about it.

The

textbooks of

anatomy

generally allude to it but

go

into

no

^{details or} explanations.

How

^{little regard is paid to it}

^may

^{be seen}

^from

the following quotation taken

from

the

most

recent treatise

on

osteology

:'°

Examine and compare the gluteal ridge in different bones: in some ^{it is} a prominent crest, in others only a broad rough area, and in others again it is

representedby arough fossa (fossahypotrochantcrica), orthese different aspects

may

bemoreorlesscombinedinone specimen.

SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS FROM THE LITERATURE The

hypotrochanteric fossa

was

first noted

and named

in 1883, by

Houze.

It is,in

man,

a slight to pronounced, nearly vertical, oblong hollow, situated in the lateral portion of the posterior aspect of the

upper

part of the femoral diaphysis. It differs in

man, more

orless, both in location

and

shape,

from

that in other primates. It exists in close relationwith the jrluteal ridge

and

the third trochanter.

-"Frazer, _J. E., The anatomy of the

human

skeleton, 3rd ed.. pp. MZ-i-^

London, 1933.

I^

SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS

^{VOL. 92}

The

true significance

and

function of the fossa have never been definitely determined.

Most

of those

who

have dealt with ^it regard

itasa

mere

structuralvariant for theinsertionof the gluteus

maxnnus

muscle.

Houze was

of the opinion that the muscle inserted in its

borders as well as in its base, but the statement ^is of a rather general nature

and

^{is not} supported by any exact determinations. Bumiiller attributed the fossa to the vastus ^lateralis; for

Evangeli-Tramond,

and probablyafter

him

Paul-Boncour,^itrepresented the free space be- tween the insertions of the gluteus

and

the cruralis;

Pearson and

Bell doubted its dependence

on

the gluteus.

There

is

no

^{report in} anyof thecontributionstothesubject,save that of

Evangeli-Tramond,

of

any

observation on theactual contents of the fossa ⁱⁿ the cadaver.

Houze,

with probably Testut and ^others, believed the fossato have been

more

frequent in earlier than ^{in recent}

man.

This assumption has not yet been sufficiently corroborated.

Houze was

evidently mis-

led, as far as his I'urfooz material

was

concerned,

by

^{the large} proportion of juvenile femora inthe collection.

Costa, Klaatsch. and Pearson

and

Bell

came

to regard the fossa as an atavistic feature.

Von Torok and

Bertaux expressed the belief that its frequency

would show

race differences. In Houze's and Bertaux', but not in Costa's material, it appeared to be scarce in the Negro.

Von

Torok, Evangeli-Tramond,

and

^Pearson

and

Bell

found

the fossa

more

frequent ⁱⁿ the males than in the females;

Pearson and

Bell encountered ^it

more commonly on

the left than

on

the right

femur

in

modern

Londoners, but the reverse ⁱⁿ the

Naquada.

Houze

encountered the fossa in the bones of fetuses

and newborn

(Furfooz) ;

Hyades and

Deniker

saw

it in a

Fuegian

girl of eight;

Evangeli-Tramond was

the first to recognize that it

was

better defined in adolescent than in adult femora. Boncour, in hemiplegia cases,

saw

the hollow

more

frequently and

more marked on

the affected than on the sound side.

In the opinion of

Houze,

Bumiiller, Martin,

Lehmann-Nitsche,

Boncour,

and

Klaatsch, the fossa stood in close or even genetic asso- ciation with the subtrochanteric flattening of the shaft

and

its lateral lipping at that level

—

^{in other} words, with platymery^{; but} such asso- ciation

was

notacknowledged by

Manouvrier

orby Evangeli-Tramond,

and was

found to be but ^slight by Pearson and Bell.

Pearson

and

^Bell could detect no significant association between the fossaand the third trochanter; and they failed to recognize it in the gorilla.

NO. I

THE HYl'OTROCHANTKRIC

FOSSA

HKULICKA

15 Appleton, finally, called attention to additional fossae of muscular origin on the shaft of theprimate femur.

The more

^noteworthy statistical data as to the frequency of the fossa in different racial groups

may

he tabulated as follows

:

People

l6

SMITHSONIAN

IMlSfKl.l.ANF.OUS

COM

^{.KATldNS VOL. <)-'}

All tiutv iTporls in which ihc hours were separated as to sex

(Von

Torek, Evangoli-Traniond, Pearson and ^Uell) indicate that ^tlie fossa is

more common

in the males ^{than in the temales.}

As

to side, the only two reports, hotli of IVarson and ^{Hell, are} contradictory.

Nl'W

()1^S1-'K\ A

riONS ON

Till' I'O.^SA

My own

^{interest inthe} hypotrochanteric fossa

was

not fnllyaronsed

nntil 1

examined

^{a series} of adolescent

human

femora.

The

fossa

m

these appearcil. oddly enough, not only

more common

and heltcr de- veloped than in the femora of adults, hut in

some

of the speci-

mens

it

amounted

to a truly

major

feature, all of which called for further study. l^M-tunatelv ^T could

draw

on the

now

^{um-ivaled col-}

lections oi hones, holh adult and juvenile, in

my own

division and

was

able to supplement these later, thanks ^to the kindness of Gerrit S.

Miller. ^|r.. and I'rof. T.

Wingate Todd

and his associates, by the invaluable anthropoid collections ⁱⁿ the division of

mammals,

I'nited States National

Museum,

and in the departmentof anatomy.

Western

Reserve University, in Cleveland.

The

nuiuber of specimens ex-

amined was

as follows

:

Moti-rial E.vaiiii)icd in the rrcsoit Stiidv

No.of femora No.of

femora juvenile Adult

Lemurs

:

Anthroiioids:

Juvenile ^-J Gorillas 00 ₇₇

Adult 14 Giiiupauzees .... 50 ()6

New

World monkeys

:

Orangs ^j 42

.1uvenile

"

^{Gibbons ::} ^^5

Adult ^4-'

Old Worldmonkeys

:

Juvenile 20

Adult 47

No.of

Ihiman: I'ctal toiutaul: femor.i

U. S. Wliites (^iniseellancous) 161

U. S. Negroes (miseellancous) 20j

Child-adoleseent-sulKidult

:

U. S. Whites ^(,miscellaneous') 26

U. S. Negroes (,miscellaneous1 uxi

Old Egyptians ₍XII Dynasty) 135

Old Peruvians (Pachacamac and Cliicama'l 114

N. A. Indians (miscellaneous) 62b

Eskimos (Alaskan) ; 224

NO. I 'iiiic UNI'o'i !<<»( uan'ii;uk: fossa

— _hrdmcka

₁₇

X.). of

Iliiman: Adult

:

femora

U. S. Whites ⁽niiscc-llanc(nis) l,0O0

U. S. Negroes (miscellaneous) 100

Old l^gyjitians (XII Dynasty) 200

Old Peruvians (Pachacaniac and Cliicania) 868

N. A. Indians (miscellaneous) 3,890

{•'.skinios (Alaskan) 718

Aleuts 137

Kodiak Islanders (pre-Aleut) 154

Cliinese (Canton) 152

Till'".

I'OSSA

IN

LEMURS

IfypDirorhaiilcric I'ossd in Lctiiiirs

\'o. of

femora l'"ossa in

Ilai)alciiiuis, adult 4

I,epidolcmurs, adult 6

Lemurs ("various), adolescent 2

adult 4

Total 16

All these specimens ])rc'sent aiiKjre or less

marked

marginal gluteal ridge

(forming

a part of the lateral border), and rising

from

the proximal part of this, a well-developed to

pronounced

process, the

" third trochanter^"; but there is not a tracein

any

of these specimens of the hypotrochanteric fossa.

THE FOSSA IN

Nl'AV

WORLD MONKEYS

Jfypotrochaiiteric fossa in Nczv World Monkeys

No. of

femora l'"ossain

Alouattas (Howlers)," adult 34

Atcles," adolescent 8 2 (a pair)

adult 5

Cebus, younj; 3

adult 2

Callicehus, adult i

Total ₅₃ 2

•'Severalvarieties.

In all these

American monkeys

the gluteal ridge, generally rather distinct, is marginal or nearly so;

and

in the Alouattas

and

the Ateles there is frequently on the upper \rdrt of the ridge a trace to fair development of a third trochanter, but not of the lemuroid

form

—