Efficacy of various materials in recording enamel rod endings on tooth surface for personal identification

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

Published Dec 1, 2011
https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-1475.92148
Download
pdf
Statistic

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Volume 3, Issue 2, July-December 2011

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

K Manjunath
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh
B Sivapathasundharam
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, Meenakshi Ammal Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
T Saraswathi
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh

Abstract

Aim: To analyze efficacy of cellulose acetate film, cellophane tape, and light body impression material in recording enamel rod endings on tooth surface for personal identification. Materials and Methods: Surface enamel rod endings of 30 extracted teeth were recorded from the same area of the same tooth for two times using cellulose acetate film, cellophane tape, and light body impression material. Photomicrographs of enamel rod endings were taken and subjected to Verifinger standard SDK version 5.0 software for analysis. Minutiae scores of all enamel rod end patterns obtained using these three imprint materials were statistically analyzed. Results: Cellulose acetate film imprint showed complete enamel rod end patterns and the software was able to identify the particular tooth with the same previous identification number in subsequent recordings as well. Cellophane tape and light body rubber-base impression material imprint showed incomplete enamel rod end patterns and the software failed to identify the particular tooth with the same previous identification number in subsequent recordings. Statistical analysis revealed that cellulose acetate film recorded more number of minutiae points compared with the other imprint materials. Conclusion: Cellulose acetate film is a reliable material for recording enamel rod endings on tooth surface for personal identification compared with cellophane tape and light body rubber-base impression material.

##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
K Manjunath, B Sivapathasundharam, & T Saraswathi. (2011). Efficacy of various materials in recording enamel rod endings on tooth surface for personal identification. Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences, 3(2), 71–76. https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-1475.92148
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Acharya AB, Sivapathasundharam B. Forensic Odontology. In: Rajendran R, Sivapathasundharam B, editors. Shafer’s text book of oral pathology. 6th ed. Noida, Elsevier publ; 2009. p. 871.
  2. Sharawy M, Yeager JA. Enamel. In: Bhaskar SN, editor. Orban’s Oral histology and embryology. 11th ed. Missouri, Mosby publ; 1997. p. 49.
  3. Osborn JW. Evaluation of previous assessments of prism directions in human enamel. J Dent Res 1968;47:217-22.
  4. Berkovitz BK, Holland GR, Moxiham BJ. Enamel. In: Berkovitz BK, Holland GR, Moxiham BJ, editors. Oral Anatomy, Histology and Embryology. 3rd Ed. London, Mosby publ; 2002. p.110-11.
  5. Osborn JW. Directions and interrelationships of enamel prisms from the sides of human teeth. J Dent Res 1968;47:223-32.
  6. Boyde A. Amelogenesis and the structure of enamel. In: Cohen B, Kramer IR, editors. Scientific foundations of dentistry. London, William Heinemann Medical books Ltd, 1976. p. 341-43.
  7. Manjunath K, Sriram G, Saraswathi TR, Sivapathasundharam B. Enamel rod end patterns: A preliminary study using acetate peel technique and automated biometrics. J Forensic Odontology 2008;1:33-6.
  8. Nidhi G, Kiran Jadhav BR, Ahmed M, Amberkar VS. Is re-creation of human identity possible using tooth prints? An experimental study to aid in identification. Forensic Science International 2009;192:67-71.
  9. Available from: http://www.neurotechnology.com [Last accessed on 2011 Feb 12].
  10. Ramenzoni LL, Line SR. Automated biometrics based personal identification of Hunter Schreger bands of dental enamel. Proc Biol Sci 2006;273:1155-8.
  11. Manjunath K, Sriram G, Saraswathi TR, Sivapathasundharam B, Porchelvam S. Reliability of automated biometrics in the analysis of enamel rod end patterns. J Forensic Dental Sciences 2009;1:32-6.
  12. Stefen C. Enamel structure of arctoid carnivora: Amphicyonidae, Ursidae, Procyonidae and Mustelidae. J Mammal 2001;82:450-2.
  13. Holland MM, Cave CA, Holland CA, Bille TW. Development of a quality, high throughput DNA analysis procedure for skeletal samples to assist with the identification of victims from the World Trade Center attacks. Croat Med J 2003;44:264-72.
  14. Koenigswald W, Rensberger JM, Pfretzchner HU. Changes in the tooth enamel of early Paleocene mammals allowing increased diet diversity. Nature 1987;106:150-2.
  15. Koenigswald W. U-Shade orientation of Hunter-Shereger bands in the enamel of moropus (mammalian Chalecotherudae) in comparison to some other perissodactyla. Annu Carnegie Mus 1994;63:49-64.
  16. Whittaker DK, Rothwell TJ. Phosphoglucomutase isoenzymes in human teeth. Forensic Sci Int 1984;24:219-22.
  17. Alkaya F, Ozer F, Belli S, Karakaya S. Acetate Peel Technique: a rapid ay of preparing sequential surface replicas of dental hard tissues for microscopic examination. Archives Oral Biology 2005;50:837-42.