Dental sex dimorphism: Using odontometrics and digital jaw radiography

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Apr 1, 2017
https://doi.org/10.4103/jfo.jfds_78_15
Download
pdf
Statistic

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Volume 9, Issue 1, January-April 2017

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

B Satish
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Hyderabad Karnataka Education Society's, S. Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Gulbarga, Karnataka
Chanchal Moolrajani
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Hyderabad Karnataka Education Society's, S. Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Gulbarga, Karnataka
Maharudrappa Basnaker
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Hyderabad Karnataka Education Society's, S. Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Gulbarga, Karnataka
Prashant Kumar
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Hyderabad Karnataka Education Society's, S. Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Gulbarga, Karnataka
undefined undefined
undefined
undefined undefined
undefined

Abstract

Context: Estimating the gender from the human skeletal remains can guide the forensic investigator in revealing the missing person's identity. Aims: (1) To determine the utility of the various parameters taken on the orthopantomographs (mandible) and of odontometrics on tooth remains to estimate the gender. (2) To determine the most dimorphic parameter taken on the radiograph as well as tooth (odontometrics) in the study taken. Study and Design: (1) A retrospective study was planned on 200 subjects (100 males and 100 females) in the age group of 18–30 years and the following parameters (maximum ramus height, bigonion width, and bicondylar breadth) were measured on the orthopantomograph. (2) A prospective clinical study was planned on 200 subjects (100 males and 100 females) in the age group of 18–30 years, to measure the mesio-distal width of permanent maxillary central incisors and canines directly in the patient's mouth, using Digital Vernier calipers. Statistical Analysis Used: The mean, range, and standard deviation were calculated for each variable in the study. The Z-score test was done to find out the magnitude of sexual dimorphism for each parameter in each part of the study. Results: Maximum ramus height proved to be the most dimorphic parameter depicting the utility of mandible for the estimation of gender of the deceased. Permanent maxillary central incisor proved to be more dimorphic than the maxillary canines, depicting it to be population specific. Conclusion: Measurements taken on the mandible proved to be useful in the estimation of gender of the deceased. In cases of fragmentary or missing mandible, odontometrics can be used. Hence, teeth proved to be an adjunct tool in the determination of gender of the deceased.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
B Satish, Chanchal Moolrajani, Maharudrappa Basnaker, Prashant Kumar, undefined undefined, & undefined undefined. (2017). Dental sex dimorphism: Using odontometrics and digital jaw radiography. Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences, 9(1), 52–57. https://doi.org/10.4103/jfo.jfds_78_15
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Pereira C, Bernardo M, Pestana D, Santos JC, Mendonça MC. Contribution of teeth in human forensic identification–Discriminant function sexing odontometrical techniques in Portuguese population. J Forensic Leg Med 2010;17:105‑10.
  2. Anuthama K, Shankar S, Ilayaraja V, Kumar GS, Rajmohan M, Vignesh P. Determining dental sex dimorphism in South Indians using discriminant function analysis. Forensic Sci Int 2011;212:86-9.
  3. Prabhu S, Acharya AB. Odontometric sex assessment in Indians. Forensic Sci Int 2009;192:129.e1‑5.
  4. Angadi PV, Hemani S, Prabhu S, Acharya AB. Analyses of odontometric sexual dimorphism and sex assessment accuracy on a large sample. J Forensic Leg Med 2013;20:673‑7.
  5. Indira AP, Markande A, David MP. Mandibular ramus: An indicator for sex determination – A digital radiographic study. J Forensic Dent Sci 2012;4:58‑62.
  6. Yuwanati M, KariaA, Yuwanati M. Canine tooth dimorphism: An adjunct for establishing sex identity. J Forensic Dent Sci 2012;4:80‑3.
  7. Moorrees CF, Thomsen SO, Jensen E, Yen PK. Mesio‑Distal crown diameters of the deciduous and permanent teeth in individuals. J Dent Res 1957;37:30‑47.
  8. Townsend GC, Brown T. Tooth size characteristics of Australian aborigines. Occas Pap Hum Biol 1979;1:17‑38.
  9. Saini V, Srivastava R, Rai RK, Shamal SN, Singh TB, Tripathi SK. Mandibular ramus: An indicator for sex in fragmentary mandible. J Forensic Sci 2011;56 Suppl 1:S13‑6.
  10. Lux CJ, Conradt C, Burden D, Komposch G. Dental arch widths and mandibular‑maxillary base widths in Class II malocclusions between early mixed and permanent dentitions. Angle Orthod 2003;73:674‑85.
  11. Garn SM, Cole PE, Wainwright RL, Guire KE. Sex discriminatory effectiveness using combinations of permanent teeth. J Dent Res 1977;56:697.
  12. Franklin D, Higgins PO, Charles E. Oxnard and Ian Dadour. Discriminant function sexing of mandible of Indegenous South Africans. Forensic Sci Int 2008;179:84e. 1‑84.e5.
  13. Laster WS, Ludlow JB, Bailey LJ, Hershey HG. Accuracy of measurements of mandibular anatomy and prediction of asymmetry in panoramic radiographic images. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2005;34:343‑9.
  14. Kambylafkas P, Murdock E, Gilda E, Tallents RH, Kyrkanides S. Validity of panoramic radiographs for measuring mandibular asymmetry. Angle Orthod 2006;76:388-93.
  15. Humphrey LT, Dean MC, Stringer CB. Morphological variation in great ape and modern human mandibles. J Anat 1999;195(Pt 4):491‑513.
  16. Al‑Shamout R, Ammoush M, Alrbata R, Al‑Habahbah A. Age and gender differences in gonial angle, ramus height and bigonial width in dentate subjects. Pak Oral Dent J 2012;32:81‑7.
  17. Ditch Larry E, Rose Jerome C. A multivariate dental sexing technique. American journal of physical anthropology 1972;37:61-64.
  18. Vodanovic M, Demo Z, Njemirovskij V, Keros J, Brkić H. Odontometrics: A useful method for sex determination in an archaeological skeletal population? J Archaeol Sci 2007;34:905‑13. 19. Alvesalo Lassi. Sex chromosomes and human growth. Human genetics 1997;101:1-5.
  19. Garn SM, Lewis AB, Swindler DR, Kerewsky RS. Genetic control of sexual dimorphism in tooth size. J Dent Res 1967;41:411-6.
  20. Acharya AB, Mainali S. Univariate sex dimorphism in the Nepalese dentition and the use of discriminant functions in gender assessment. Forensic Sci Int 2007;173:47-56.