Differences of enamel print patterns between buccal and lingual surfaces of extracted permanent maxillary first premolar

Sheng Cheng Soo, Nani Murniati, Andriani Harsanti, Yuti Malinda, Fahmi Oscandar

Abstract


Introduction: Ameloglyphics is the study of enamel print patterns on the tooth surface. Enamel print patterns are unique to each individual as they differ on each tooth. The similarity of tooth prints on buccal and lingual surfaces remains questionable as no research has been conducted thus far. The premolar was chosen in this experiment due to its low risk of damage because it is protected by cheek and rarely used compared to other teeth. Thus, the results obtained will be more precise and have higher accuracy than using other teeth. This research was aimed to investigate the differences between enamel print patterns on buccal and lingual surfaces of maxillary right first premolar. Methods: An analytic study was conducted by observing and analysing a total of 34 teeth samples using the purposive sampling method. The middle third of the buccal and lingual tooth surfaces was captured directly after magnified with a stereomicroscope. Photomicrographs of samples were then analysed using SourceAFIS biometric software. This software will process the image and shows patterns of enamel print. Afterwards, the enamel print patterns were observed and classified according to Manjunath Classification. Results: The results suggested that all 34 samples show a similarity of enamel print patterns on both the buccal and lingual surfaces. The interpretations of photomicrographs were statistically analysed using the Statistical Package of Social Science (SPSS) software. The similarity may be due to the same placement of developing tooth bud, temperature, environmental factor, genetics, pressure and nutrition to the ameloblasts cells in a tooth. Conclusion: Both buccal and lingual in the samples show high similarity due to the very high frequencies of similar sub-patterns occur on both surfaces. Tooth print can be used as a valuable tool in forensic science for personal identification with good prospects in the field of forensic dentistry.


Keywords


Enamel print pattern; permanent maxillary right first premolar; ameloglyphics

Full Text:

PDF

References


Dinkar D, Siddarth P, Shravya M, Kishore B, Nayak SV, Raghavendra K, et al. Ameloglyphics – A mirror within you. Austin J Forensic Sci Criminol. 2018; 5(1): 1075.

Debnath N, Gupta R, Nongthombam RS, Chandran P. Forensic odontology. J Med Soc. 2016; 30(1): 20–3. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4958.175794

Deshmukh RA. Need for newer techniques for personal identification. J Forensic Res. 2015; 6(3): 284. DOI: 10.4172/2157-7145.1000284

Bansode SC, Kulkarni MM. Importance of palatal rugae in individual identification. 2009; 1(2): 77-81. DOI: 10.4103/0974-2948.60378

Sugunakar RGS, Rao TM, Nandan SRK, Kulkarni PG, Reddy SPD. Ameloglyphics - Can it aid in forensic identification. Indian J Dent Adv. 2014; 6(4): 1669–73. DOI: 10.5866/2014.641669

Bharanidharan R, Karthik R, Rameshkumar A, Rajashree P, Rajkumar K. Ameloglyphics: An adjunctive aid in individual identification. SRM J Res Dent Sci. 2014; 5(4): 264-8. DOI: 10.4103/0976-433X.145147

Juneja M, Juneja S, Rakesh N, Kantharaj YDB. Ameloglyphics: A possible forensic tool for person identification following high temperature and acid exposure. J Forensic Dent Sci. 2016; 8(1): 28-31. DOI: 10.4103/0975-1475.176951

Sharma BS, Srivastav AK, Rajwar YC, Sharma SS, Sharma D, Batra P. Forensic: At first sight. Ann Dent Spec. 2014; 2(2): 59–63.

Manjunath K, Saraswathi TR, Sriram G, Sundharam S, Porchelvam S. Reliability of automated biometrics in the analysis of enamel rod end patterns. J Forensic Dent Sci. 2009; 1(1): 32–6. DOI: 10.4103/0974-2948.50887

Manjunath K, Sivapathasundharam B. Analysis of enamel rod end pattern at different levels of enamel and its significance in ameloglyphics. J Forensic Res. 2014; 5(4): 235. DOI: 10.4172/2157-7145.1000235

Howell DC. Statistical Methods for Psychology. 6th ed. California: Wadsworth Publishing; 2006. pp. 1–9.

Snape D, Spencer L. The Foundations of Qualitative Research. In: Ritchie J, Lewis J. Qualitative Research Practice. 1st ed. California: SAGE; 2003. pp. 349.

Avon SL. Forensic odontology: The roles and responsibilities of the dentist. 2004; 70(7): 453–8.

Shirish JP, Subrao BS. Study of enamel rod end patterns using acetate peel technique and automated biometrics for personal identification. Int J Dent Med Res. 2014; 1(4): 47–50.

White SN, Luo W, Paine ML, Fong H, Sarikaya M, Snead ML. Biological organization of hydroxyapatite crystallites into a fibrous continuum toughens and controls anisotropy in human enamel. J Dent Res. 2001; 80(1): 321–6. DOI: 10.1177/00220345010800010501

Ramenzoni LL, Line SRP. Automated biometrics-based personal identification of the Hunter-Schreger bands of dental enamel. Proc Biol Sci. 2006; 273(1590): 1155–8. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2005.3409

Gupta N, Jadhav K, Ahmed Mujib BR, Amberkar VS. Is re-creation of human identity possible using tooth prints? An experimental study to aid in identification. Forensic Sci Int. 2009; 192(1-3): 67-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.07.017

Dahal S, Boaz K, Srikant N, Agrawal NK. Ameloglyphics: A novel appraisal of the enamel structure in identification of an individual. J Inst Med. 2014; 36(3): 64–7.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24198/pjd.vol32no2.21639

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


 

Creative Commons License All publications by the Universitas Padjadjaran [e-ISSN: 2549-6212, p-ISSN: 1979-0201] are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License .

Visitor Stat