| |
|
|
| Year : 2015 | Volume
: 26
| Issue : 6 | Page : 576-581 |
|
| To evaluate the accuracy of various dental parameters used for the gender determination in Nagpur District population |
|
|
Swapnil N Patil1, Sushil B Naik2, Seema D Kamble3, Vandana B Kokane1
1 Department of Endodontics, VSPM Dental College and Research Centre, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Public Health, VSPM Dental College and Research Centre, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
3 Department of Public Health, Nair Dental College and Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Click here for correspondence address and email
| Date of Submission | 13-Aug-2015 |
| Date of Decision | 06-Sep-2015 |
| Date of Acceptance | 24-Dec-2015 |
| Date of Web Publication | 18-Feb-2016 |
|
|
 |
|
 Abstract | | |
Context: Gender determination is considered an important step in reconstructing the biological profile of unknown individuals from the forensic context. Assessment of sex differences from human remains will be of immense help as it would narrow down fields of search to 50 %.
Aims: To evaluate the accuracy of various dental parameters used for the gender determination.
Settings and Design: The aim of the present study was to investigate the accuracy of various methods employed in gender determination or personal identification such as mesiodistal width of molars, mesiodistal width of canine, mandibular and maxillary canine index in age group of 15 to 65 years.
Methods and Material: A total of 200 patients were selected comprising of both the genders in the age group of 15-65 years belonging to various parts of Nagpur. The mesiodistal crown width of mandibular and maxillary permanent molar and canine teeth and the intercanine distance was measured and the values were noted. Statistical analysis used: the data was analysed using SPSS 18 software.
Results: The mean of mesio distal width of maxillary and mandibular molar in males and females is suggestive of gender dimorphism in maxillary molars which was statistically significant.The maxillary inter-canine distance was greater in males and was statistically significant.
Conclusions: The dental parameters can be used as a tool for accurate gender determination in forensic investigations. Keywords: Canine index, forensic investigation, gender dimorphism, intercanine distance
How to cite this article:
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 |
How to cite this URL:
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 [serial online] 2015 [cited 2023 Mar 21];26:576-81. Available from: https://www.ijdr.in/text.asp?2015/26/6/576/176918 |
Historically, human identification is one of the most challenging subjects that man has confronted. Sex determination is one of the prime factors which assist in the identification of an individual. Correct sex identification limits the pool of missing persons to just one half of the population. [1] Gender assessment from tooth measurements act as a useful adjunct to identify forensic and anthropological skeletal specimens. In the case of a complete jaw bone, it is possible to determine gender by measuring teeth sizes that show some difference in both gender and population. [2]
Teeth are the hardest and chemically most stable tissues in the body, which exhibit least turnover of natural structure, thereby providing the best evidence for evolutionary change. [3]
"Sexual Dimorphism" refers to those differences in size, stature, and appearance between male and female that can be applied to dental identification because no two mouths are alike. Many anatomical structures have been studied, but the teeth and their measurements seem to be the most reliable method. [4],[5],[6]
Dentist's role in criminal investigation includes collection of information from bite marks, lip prints, and teeth found in crime sites. A dental surgeon has to be actively involved in various objectives of forensic dentistry such as age and gender determination, personal identification of unknown deceased person, analyzing bite marks as evidence, and participating in mass disaster. The role of a dental surgeon in personal identification and criminal investigation is very much important, as his/her evidence would be very much useful in law and justice. The benefits of determining sex from odontometric features are simplicity, low cost, and speed. However, mistakes may be made in cases where normal dimensions of teeth are altered. Hence to increase the percentage of success in determining the sex, it is best to combine different methods. [7],[8]
The mesiodistal and buccolingual crown dimensions of teeth have also been studied for gender determination in sub adult individuals. Cardoso (2008) indicates that, for both adults and sub adults, the canines are the pieces that have greater gender dimorphism. According to Rosing (1983), the teeth are only one of the elements that are developed with the adult size and that their dimorphic morphological character is maintained over time. [9]
Recently, personal identification is made by analyzing the DNA profile of deceased persons with that of their relatives' DNA profile. However, this procedure is sophisticated and requires a long time and is not available in rural and remote parts of the town. Hence, conventional methods have to be followed. [10]
Tooth size standards are frequently used in sex determination. Out of the two proportions-width and length, the former is considered to be more important. Mandibular canines are found to exhibit greatest sexual dimorphism. The mandibular canines have a mean age of eruption of 10.87 years, and they are the last teeth to be extracted with respect to age. They are less affected by periodontal diseases and are most likely to survive severe trauma such as air disasters, hurricanes, or conflagration. These findings indicate that mandibular canines can be considered as the "key teeth" for personal identification. It is also involved in measurement of mesiodistal width, intercanine distance, and canine index. It is an effort to corroborate the results with those obtained in the similar studies and to establish the effectiveness of mandibular canine index in predicting sex, taking correct dental alignment into consideration. [11]
The aim of the present study was to assess the dimorphism of human permanent maxillary and mandibular canine and molar, the objective of this study was to investigate the accuracy of various methods employed in gender determination or personal identification such as mesiodistal width of molars, mesiodistal width of canine, mandibular, and maxillary canine index in age group of 15-65 years.
| Subjects and Methods | |  |
A cross-sectional study was carried out. A total of 200 patients visiting VSPM Dental College and Research Centre, Nagpur, were included in the present study comprising both the genders in the age group of 15-50 years belonging to various parts of Nagpur. This age group was selected as all the canines would have erupted by this age and attrition is expected to be minimal. Methods for the study consisted of measuring the maxillary and mandibular molars and canine widths and intercanine distance of these patients. Patients having caries free teeth with absence of spacing in the anterior teeth and normal molar and canine relationship were included in the study. Subjects with fragmentary teeth, abnormal teeth alignment, missing anterior teeth, and crowded and increased overjet and overbite were excluded from the study. The mesiodistal crown width of mandibular and maxillary permanent molar and canine teeth, i.e., the greatest mesiodistal width of the crown between the contact points of the teeth on either side of the jaw and inter canine distance, i.e., the distance from mesial contact point of left canine up to mesial contact point of right canine was measured using geometric divider with the provision to fix it in the desired position so as to avoid any errors in recording the exact measurements. The values were noted. The data collected were evaluated by t-test using SPSS 18 software [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3].
| Results | | |
The mean of mesiodistal width of maxillary molar in males was found to be 10.540 ± 0.7166 and in females, it was 10.045 ± 0.5227 mm (P < 0.001) suggestive of gender dimorphism in maxillary molars which is statistically significant. Similarly, the mesiodistal width of mandibular molar in males was found to be 11.370 ± 0.8028 mm (P < 0.001) and in females, it was 10.790 ± 0.7323 mm (P < 0.001) suggestive of gender dimorphism in mandibular molars which was statistically significant [Table 1] and [Figure 4]. | Figure 4: Gender dimorphism in mesiodistal width of maxillary and mandibular molars
Click here to view |
 | Table 1: Gender dimorphism in mesiodistal width of maxillary and mandibular molar (mm)
Click here to view |
The mean of intercanine distance of maxillary canine in males was found to be 30.540 ± 2.4264 mm and in females, it is 29.310 ± 2.4962 mm (P < 0.001) suggestive of gender dimorphism in maxillary canine. However, the mean of intercanine distance of mandibular canine in males was found to be 21.655 ± 1.7461 mm (P = 0.50) and in females, it was 21.810 ± 1.4835 mm (P = 0.50). The gender dimorphism in mandibular canine was statistically insignificant [Table 2] and [Figure 5]. | Table 2: Gender dimorphism in maxillary and mandibular intercanine distance (mm)
Click here to view |
 | Figure 5: Gender dimorphism in maxillary and mandibular intercanine distance
Click here to view |
The mean of mesiodistal width of maxillary canine in males was found to be 8.460 ± 0.8752 mm and in females, it was 7.875 ± 0.6756 mm (P < 0.001) suggestive of gender dimorphism in maxillary canines which is statistically significant. Similarly, the mean of mesiodistal width of mandibular canine in males was found to be 7.465 ± 0.6165 mm (P < 0.001) and in females, it was 6.960 ± 0.5397 mm (P < 0.001) suggestive of gender dimorphism in mandibular canine which is statistically significant. It also suggests that mesiodistal width of maxillary and mandibular canine was greater in males than in females [Table 3] and [Figure 6]. | Table 3: Gender dimorphism in mesiodistal width of maxillary and mandibular canine (mm)
Click here to view |
 | Figure 6: Gender dimorphism in mesiodistal width of maxillary and mandibular canines
Click here to view |
The maxillary canine index in males was found to be 0.277 and in females, it was 0.268 (P < 0.001) suggestive of gender dimorphism in maxillary canines. Similarly, the mandibular canine index in males was found to be 0.344 (P < 0.001) and in females, it was 0.319 (P < 0.001) suggestive of gender dimorphism in mandibular canine. The canine index was found to be greater in males as compared to females in both maxilla and mandible, which was statistically significant [Table 4] and [Figure 7]. | Table 4: Gender dimorphism in maxillary canine index and mandibular canine index (mm)
Click here to view |
 | Figure 7: Gender dimorphism in maxillary canine index and mandibular canine index
Click here to view |
The percentage of gender dimorphism in maxillary molar was found to be 4.980 and in mandibular molar, it was found to be 5.375 suggestive of possibility/existence of gender dimorphism in molars [Table 5] and [Figure 8]. | Table 5: Percentage of gender dimorphism in maxillary and mandibular molars
Click here to view |
 | Figure 8: Percentage of gender dimorphism in maxillary and mandibular molar
Click here to view |
The percentage of gender dimorphism in maxillary canine was found to be 7.496 and in mandibular canine, it was found to be 7.255 suggestive of possibility/existence of gender dimorphism in canines [Table 6] and [Figure 9]. | Table 6: Percentage of gender dimorphism in maxillary and mandibular canines
Click here to view |
 | Figure 9: Percentage of gender dimorphism in maxillary and mandibular canine
Click here to view |
Percentage of Gender Dimorphism in mesiodistal width of molar =  ; where Xm is the mean mesiodistal width in males and Xf is the mean mesiodistal width in females.
The mean of maxillary molars of total population (male and female) was found to be 10.293 ± 0.6730 mm which was suggestive of average mesiodistal width of maxillary molars. The mean of mandibular molars of total population (male and female) was found to be 11.080 ± 0.8197 mm which was suggestive of average mesiodistal width of mandibular molars. The mean of maxillary intercanine distance of total population (male and female) was found to be 29.925 ± 2.5316 mm which was suggestive of average maxillary intercanine distance of the study population.
The mean of mandibular intercanine distance of total population (male and female) was found to be 21.732 ± 1.6180 mm which was suggestive of average mandibular intercanine distance of the study population.
The mean of maxillary and mandibular canines in total sample (male and female) was found to be 8.167 ± 0.8332 mm and 7.213 ± 0.6309 mm, respectively, which was suggestive of average mesiodistal width of maxillary and mandibular canines, respectively [Table 7].
| Discussion | | |
Gender determination in damaged/mutilated dead bodies or from skeletal remains constitutes the foremost step for identification in medico-legal examination. Although DNA profile gives accurate results yet measurement of linear dimensions, such as inter canine distance and mesiodistal width of canine teeth can be used for determination of sex in large population because it is simple, reliable, inexpensive, and easy to perform. Moreover, mandibular canines exhibit the greatest sexual dimorphism among all teeth and differ from other teeth with respect to high level of survival in dentition. Considering the fact that there are differences in odontometric features in specific populations, even within the same population in the historical and evolutional context, it is necessary to determine specific population values in order to make identification possible on the basis of dental measurements. It has already been opined that in the present day humans, sexual dimorphism in mandibular canines is not merely a coincidence but can be expected to be based on functional activity.
Vanaki et al. [12] in their study showed a statistically significant difference in the mesiodistal diameter of the crown of the maxillary canine and mandibular canine. In males, the measured value for canine was 8.09 mm in maxilla, 7.11 mm in mandible (P < 0.007), and females showed 7.49 mm in maxilla, 6.31 mm in mandible (P < 0.003) Canines showed maximum percentage of sexual dimorphism in maxilla and mandible mesiodistally, 9.1 and 10.4 mm. Similar results were found in the present study where the mesiodistal diameter of the crown of maxillary and mandibular canine in males was 8.460 ± 0.8752 mm in maxilla and 7.465 ± 0.6165 mm in mandible, whereas, in females, it is 7.875 ± 0.6756 mm in maxilla and 6.960 ± 0.5397 mm in mandible (P = 0.001). The values are higher in males than females showing statistical significance.
The percentage of dimorphism is also statistically significant in canines, i.e., 7.496% in maxillary and 7.255% in mandible (P = 0.001).
Vishwakarma et al. [11] in his study showed that mandibular canine indices for right and left canines were found to be significantly different in male and female. Sexual dimorphism was calculated, and right mandibular canine was found to be more dimorphic than left mandibular canine. The mandibular intercanine distance was not statistically significant. In the present study, the right mandibular canine (12.51%) is found to be more dimorphic than left mandibular canine (10.15%). Similar results are also found in the present study with maxillary and mandibular intercanine distance in males and females. In males, the intercanine distance is found to be 30.540 ± 2.4264 mm in maxilla and 29.310 ± 2.4962 mm in mandible, whereas, in females, it was found to be 21.655 ± 1.7461 mm in maxilla and 21.810 ± 1.4835 mm in mandible. The values were statistically significant in maxilla but not much in mandible which is again similar to the mentioned study. The percentage of dimorphism is also statistically significant in canines, i.e., 7.496% in maxillary and 7.255% in mandible (P = 0.001).
Kaushal et al. [13] who have reported mean right canine width in males 7.229 ± 0.280 mm and in females 6.690 ± 0.256 mm, and left canine width in males 7.299 ± 0.292 mm and in females, 6.693 ± 0.323 mm in their study on 60 subjects (males: 30 and females: 30) of 17-21 years age group, supports our findings in males and females where the mesiodistal width of maxillary canine is 8.460 ± 0.8752 mm and 7.465 ± 0.6165 mm in mandible in males and 7.875 ± 0.6756 mm in maxilla and 6.960 ± 0.5397 mm in mandible (P = 0.001) in females which are higher in males than females showing statistical significance. These findings are also supported by Srivastava. [14]
Khangura et al. [15] revealed that all permanent maxillary incisors and canines exhibit larger mean values of mesiodistal dimension in males as compared to females, but only canines were found to be statistically significant for sexual dimorphism. Similarly, in our study, we have taken mesiodistal dimensions of molars and canine and we have found that both molar and canine exhibit a statistically significant dimorphism.
Deo [16] had reported the mean mesiodistal width was 9.69 mm (right) and 9.62 mm (left) in males and 9.40 mm (right) and 9.56 mm (left) in females. The mean buccolingual width was 10.45 mm (right) and 10.49 mm (left) in males and 10.21 mm (right) and 10.23 mm (left) in females. The differences between males and females in all dimensions measured except left maxillary mesiodistal width were statistically significant (P < 0.05). All the dimensions exhibited sexual dimorphism of 3.0% except left maxillary mesiodistal width which showed 1.0% which is similar to the results of the present study. The mean of mesiodistal width of maxillary molars in males and females are 10.540 ± 0.7166 mm and 10.045 ± 0.5227 mm, respectively, which is not much statistically significant but the mesiodistal width of mandibular molars in males and females are 11.370 ± 0.8028 mm and 10.790 ± 0.7323 mm which is highly significant.
| Conclusion | | |
Our study conclusively establishes the existence of a definite statistically significant gender dimorphism with various dental parameters. The mesiodistal width of maxillary molar was greater in males than in females and mesiodistal width of mandibular molars was greater in males than in females and was statistically significant. The maxillary intercanine distance is greater in males and is statistically significant while. The mandibular intercanine distance is not much of significance in gender determination. It also suggests that mesiodistal width of maxillary and maxillary and mandibular canine is greater in males than in females. The canine index is greater in males as compared to females in both maxilla and mandible. The percentage of gender dimorphism in maxillary and mandibular molar and maxillary and mandibular canine is suggestive of possibility/existence of gender dimorphism in molars and canines. The dental parameters such as mesiodistal width of mandibular and maxillary molars and canine as well as inter canine distance can be used as a tool for accurate gender determination in forensic investigations. Further future studies are needed with bigger sample size for evaluating the perfect accuracy of these parameters in gender determination.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest
| References | | |
| 1. | Narang RS, Manchanda AS, Malhotra R, Bhatia HS. Sex determination by mandibular canine index and molar odontometrics: A comparative study. Indian J Oral Sci 2014;5:16-20.   |
| 2. | Lakhanpal M, Gupta N, Rao NC, Vashisth S. Tooth dimension variations as a gender determinant in permanent maxillary teeth. JSM Dent 2013;1:1014. |
| 3. | Khaitan TK, Ramaswamy P, Sudhakar S, Smitha B, Uday G. Role of mandibular canines in establishment of gender. Egypt J Forensic Sci 2014;4:71-4. |
| 4. | Parekh DH, Patel SV, Zalawadia AZ, Patel SM. Odontometric study of maxillary canine teeth to establish sexual dimorphism in Gujarat population. Int J Biol Med Res 2012;3:1935-7. |
| 5. | Rai B, Anand S. Gender determination by diagonal distances of teeth. J Biol Anthropol 2006;1:1-3. |
| 6. | Suazo GI, Cantín LM, López FB, Sandoval MC, Torres MS, Gajardo RP, et al. Sexual dimorphism in mesiodistal and bucolingual tooth dimensions in Chilean people. Int J Morphol 2008;26:609-14. |
| 7. | Sharma M, Gorrea RK. Importance of mandibular and maxillary canines in sex determination. J Punjab Acad Forensic Med Toxicol 2010;10:27-30. |
| 8. | Parekh DD, Zalawadia DA, Ruparelia DS, Patel DS, Rathod DS, Patel DS. Study of mandibular canine teeth dimorphism in establishing sex identity in Gujarat region. NJIRM 2011;2:6-9. |
| 9. | Suazo GI, Zavando MD, Smith RL. Sex determination in mandibles in the first year of life by a quantitative approach. Int J Morphol 2009;27:113-6. |
| 10. | Ahuja P, Manchanda A. Application of oral hard and soft tissue structures in sex determination. Internet J Forensic Sci 2009;4:1-7. |
| 11. | 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. |
| 12. | 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. |
| 13. | Kaushal S, Patnaik VV, Sood V, Agnihotri G. Sex determination in north Indians using mandibular canine index. JIAFM 2004;26:45-9. |
| 14. | Srivastava PC. Correlation of odontometric measures in sex determination. J Indian Acad Forensic Med 2010;32:56-61. |
| 15. | Khangura RK, Sircar K, Singh S, Rastogi V. Sex determination using mesiodistal dimension of permanent maxillary incisors and canines. J Forensic Dent Sci 2011;3:81-5. [ PUBMED] |
| 16. | Deo E. A dimorphic study of maxillary first molar crown dimensions of Urhobos in Abraka, South-Southern Nigeria. J Morphol Sci 2012;29:96-100. |
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Swapnil N Patil
Department of Endodontics, VSPM Dental College and Research Centre, Nagpur, Maharashtra
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.176918
[Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6], [Figure 7], [Figure 8], [Figure 9]
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6], [Table 7] |
|
| This article has been cited by | | 1 |
Applicability of the mandibular canine index for sex estimation: a systematic review |
|
| Maille Ferreira Nunes Rocha, Paulo Henrique Viana Pinto, Ademir Franco, Ricardo Henrique Alves da Silva | | Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences. 2022; 12(1) | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 2 |
Estimation of Sex From Dental Arch Dimensions: An Odontometric Analysis |
|
| Tanuj Kanchan, Vinay Chugh, Ankita Chugh, Puneet Setia, Rutwik Shedge, Kewal Krishan | | Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2021; 32(8): 2713 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Article Access Statistics | | | Viewed | 6217 | | | Printed | 366 | | | Emailed | 0 | | | PDF Downloaded | 179 | | | Comments | [Add] | | | Cited by others | 2 | | |
|
|
Users online:
