Final answer:
Adult age estimates are less accurate than juvenile estimates because adult skeletal markers vary greatly, are biased by reference samples skewed towards younger individuals, and traditional methods use broad age intervals for older adults. Juveniles, in contrast, have more distinct growth markers, like epiphyseal fusion and dental development, allowing for more precise estimations.
Step-by-step explanation:
Why Adult Age Estimates are Less Accurate than Juvenile Age Estimates
The accuracy of age estimates for adults is generally lower than for juveniles due to a variety of factors. In adults, the skeletal markers used for age estimation, such as changes in the pelvis and skull, vary greatly and can be influenced by numerous environmental and individual factors. This variability is compounded by the fact that many traditional paleodemographic methods are biased toward younger individuals within the reference samples, including military personnel who tend to be younger. This results in what's called "age mimicry." Moreover, traditional methods often use wide age intervals for older adults, leading to difficulties in distinguishing between a fifty-year-old and a ninety-year-old, who would have vastly different mortality and morbidity profiles.
By contrast, juveniles have more consistent growth rates and display more distinct growth markers such as epiphyseal fusion and dental development, allowing for more precise age determination. Further complicating adult age estimation is the diversity of adult lifestyles, which can affect the skeletal morphology.