Applicability of odontometric dimensions and indices in sexual dimorphism among Nalgonda population


Sandipamu Rani


Background: Teeth morphology varies among different population groups as they are exposed to various environmental conditions. Teeth being the most stable and hard tissue, human identification can be made when the other tissues are unavailable. Odontometric analysis can be considered for anthropological and forensic investigations. Aim: The aim of this study is to assess the reliability of odontometric mesiodistal (MD) width dimensions and indices in sexual dimorphism among Nalgonda population. Materials and Methods: A total of 180 ideal study dental models of patients between the age range of 18 and 25 years were collected from the Department of Orthodontics. Selection criteria include teeth with Class I molar and canine relation, free of anomalies, or caries. Maximum MD widths of all teeth and arch parameters (intercanine width, interpremolar width, and intermolar width) were measured and incisor index, canine index, premolar index, and molar index were calculated. Sexual dimorphism was calculated using Garn and Lewis equation. Statistical Analysis: The recorded data were subjected to statistical analysis using independent unpaired t-test. Results and Conclusion: Mandibular canines followed by maxillary canines showed greater sexual dimorphism among all teeth. Maxillary right canine index, mandibular left canine index, maxillary right incisor index, inter premolar and intermolar widths showed statistically significant difference between males and females (P < 0.05). The results of this study revealed significant sexual dimorphism with the use of odontometric dimensions, canine index, incisor index, and arch parameters. These parameters could be used as adjunctive aids by the forensic expertise in human identification.


How to Cite
Sandipamu Rani. (2017). Applicability of odontometric dimensions and indices in sexual dimorphism among Nalgonda population. Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences, 9(3), 175–180.


  1. Leung CK. Forensic Odontology. Hong Kong Med Diary Dent Bull 2008;13:16‑20.
  2. Jurel SK. Role of dentist in forensic investigations. J Forensic Res 2012;3:148.
  3. William PL, Bannister LH, Berry MM, Collins P, Dyson M, Dussek JE. The Teeth in Gray’s Anatomy. 38th ed. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 2000. p. 1699‑721.
  4. Kiesu JA. Human odontometrics. In: The Study of Variation in Adult Tooth Size. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1990. p. 125‑34.
  5. Garn SM, LewisAB, KerewskyRS. The relationship between sexual dimorphism in tooth size and body size as studied within families. Arch Oral Biol 1967;12:299‑301.
  6. Ditch LE, Rose JC. A multivariate dental sexing technique. Am J Phys Anthropol 1972;37:61‑4.
  7. Patterson KB, Kogan SL. Dental identification in wood bridge disaster. J Can Dent Assoc 1985;37:301‑6.
  8. Paramkusam G, Nadendla LK, Devulapalli RV, Pokala A. Morphometric analysis of canine in gender determination: Revisited in India. Indian J Dent Res 2014;25:425‑9.
  9. Garn SM, Lewis AB, Swindler DR, Kerewsky RS. Genetic control of sexual dimorphism in tooth size. J Dent Res 1967;46:963‑72.
  10. Garn SM, Lewis AB, Kerewsky RS. Buccolingual size asymmetry and its developmental meaning. Angle Orthod 1967;37:186‑93.
  11. Lysell L, Myrberg N. Mesiodistal tooth size in the deciduous and permanent dentitions. Eur J Orthod 1982;4:113‑22.
  12. Ates M, Karaman F, Iscan MY, Erdem TL. Sexual differences in Turkish dentition. Leg Med (Tokyo) 2006;8:288‑92.
  13. Karaman F. Use of diagonal teeth measurements in predicting gender in a Turkish population. J Forensic Sci 2006;51:630‑5.
  14. Hashim HA, Murshid ZA. Mesiodistal tooth width. A comparison between Saudi males and females. Part 1. Egypt Dent J 1993;39:343‑6.
  15. Kaushal S, Patnaik VV, Agnihotri G. Mandibular canines in sex determination. J Anat Soc India 2003;52:119‑24.
  16. Nair P, Rao BB, Annigeri RG. A study of tooth size, symmetry and sexual dimorphism. J Forensic Med Toxicol 1999;16:10‑3.
  17. Boaz K, Gupta C. Dimorphism in human maxillary and mandibular canines in establishment of gender. J Forensic Dent Sci 2009;1:42‑4.
  18. 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.
  19. Yuen KK, So LL, Tang EL. Mesiodistal crown diameters of the primary and permanent teeth in Southern Chinese –A longitudinal study. Eur J Orthod 1997;19:721‑31.
  20. Khan SH, Hassan GS, Rafique T, Hasan MN, Russell MS. Mesiodistal crown dimensions of permanent teeth in Bangladeshi population. Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Med Univ J 2011;4:81‑7.
  21. Minzuno O. Sex determination from maxillary canine by Fourier analysis. Nihon Univ Dent J 1990;2:139‑42.
  22. Kuwana T. On sex difference of maxillary canines observed in the moire stripes. Nihon Univ Dent J 1983;57:88‑9.
  23. Srivastava R, Jyoti B, Jha P, Gupta M, Devi P, Jayaram R. Gender determination from the mesiodistal dimension of permanent maxillary incisors and canines: An odontometric study. J Indian Acad Oral Med Radiol 2014;26:287‑92.
  24. Al‑Rifaiy MQ, Abdullah MA, Ashraf I, Khan N. Dimorphism of mandibular and maxillary canine teeth in establishing sex identity. Saudi Dent J 1997;9:17‑20.
  25. Vishwakarma N, Guha R. A study of sexual dimorphism in permanent mandibular canines and its implications in forensic investigations. Nepal Med Coll J 2011;13:96‑9.
  26. Patil SN, Naik SB, Kamble SD, Kokane VB. To evaluate the accuracy of various dental parameters used for the gender determination in Nagpur District population. Indian J Dent Res 2015;26:576‑81.
  27. Rao NG, Rao NN, Pai ML, Kotian MS. Mandibular canine index –A clue for establishing sex identity. Forensic Sci Int 1989;42:249‑54.
  28. Vanaki SS, Puranik RS, Sharma G, Sharma M. tooth dimension as a distinguishing trait between human sexes an odontometric study on Bagalkot population. Indian J Forensic Med Pathol 2008;1:3‑4.