THE STUDY OF SEXUAL DIFFERENCES OF METACARPUS OF THE HUMAN HAND BY METHOD OF GEOMETRICAL MORPHOMETRY
https://doi.org/10.20340/mv-mn.2015.0(1):43-48
Abstract
The study of the variability of the form and size of the human hand is one of the important problems of the skeletal biology. In recent years, with the development of analytical methods in the biometry is developing new trend of the analysis of biological forms, known as the geometric morphometry. The purpose of this research is the study of the variability of the form of the metacarpus of human hand by the method of the geometric morphometry. The geometric morphometry of digitized images of radiographs of the metacarpus of the right hand 27 men and 20 women with the appropriate software were held. It was found that differences in the geometric space of the distal epiphysis of II-nd and of V-nd metacarpal bones contribute most to the variability of the shapes of the metacarpus. More stable are the proximal epiphysis of II-V-nd and the distal epiphysis of the IV-nd metacarpal bones. The more stable state has the geometric space of the distal epiphysis of the III-nd metacarpal bone. There are statistically significant differences in the centroid size of the metacarpus of men and women. This study demonstrated in the first time the possibility of the geometric analysis of the shape of metacarpus of the hand of the human. The authors have shown the effectiveness and the potential of these methods to evaluate and compare the forms of the hand in twodimensional space. Identified sexual differences of the form of the metacarpus are the result of allometric transformation of entire limb in ontogeny of human.
About the Authors
A. S. Ermolenko
ГУЗ «УОКЦ специализированных видов медпомощи им. Е.М. Чучкалова» Минздрава Ульяновской области
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
E. N. Filippova
ФГБОУ ВПО «Ульяновский государственный университет» Министерства образования и науки РФ
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
R. M. Khayrullin
ФГБОУ ВПО «Ульяновский государственный университет» Министерства образования и науки РФ
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
F. R. Khayrullin
ФГБОУ ВПО «Ульяновский государственный университет» Министерства образования и науки РФ
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Andreev I.D. O nekotoryh osnovnyh principah arhitektury skeleta kisti cheloveka// Voprosy antropologii.- 1962.- Vyp. 12.-S. 3-14.
2. Weissenberg S. Ueber die Formen der Hand und des Fusses. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie. 1895;27:82-111.
3. Astanin L.P. Skeletkisti primatovi cheloveka.-Diss. dokt. biol. nauk.- Leningrad, 1950.-418 s.
4. Danilova E.I. Prisposobitel’naja jevoljucija kisti primatov v svjazi s proishozhdeniem cheloveka. - Diss. dokt. biol. nauk. - Kiev, 1964.- 287 s.
5. Mashkara K.I. Vlijanie truda i sporta na stroenie skeleta kisti.-Diss. dokt. med. nauk.-Leningrad, 1966.- 299 s.
6. Rigonen V.l. Rost i razvitie korotkih trubchatyh kostej kisti u zhitelej Respubliki Karelija.-Diss. kand. med. nauk. - SPb., 1998.-152 s.
7. Bookstein F.L. «Size and shape»: a comment on semantics. Syst. Zool. Vol. 1989; 38(2):173-180.
8. Pavlinov I.Ja., Mikeshina N.G. Principy i metody geometricheskoj morfometrii// Zhurnal obshhej biologii.- 2002.- T. 63.- № 6.- S. 473-493.
9. Thorpe R.S. Biometric analysis of geographic variation and racial affinities. Biol. Rev. 1976; 51:407-452.
10. Atchley W.R., Rutledge J.J., Cowley D.E. Genetic components of size and shape. 2. Multivariate covariance patterns in the rat and mouse skull. Evolution. 1981; 35(6):1037-1055.
11. Flitrv B. Common principal components and related multivariate models. NY: Wiley, 1988. 258 p.
12. Adams D.C., Rohlf F.J., Slice D. Geometric morphometrics: ten years of progress following he «revolution». Italian Journal of Zoology. 2004; 71:5-16.
13. Rohlf F.J., Slice D.E. Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Systematic Zoology. 1990; 39(1):40-59.
14. Slice D.E. Modern Morphometrics in Physical Anthropology. NY: Kluwer academic / Premium publisher, 2005; XXII. 384 p.
15. Thompson D.W. On Growth and Form. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ Press, 1961. 360 p.
16. Sneat P.H.A., Sokal R.R. Numerical taxonomy. San Francisco: Freeman, 1973. 573 p.
17. Bookstein F.L. Morphometric tools for landmark data: geometry and biology. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991. 198 p.
18. Rohlf F.J., Marcus L. A revolution in morphometrics. Trends in Ecol. Evol. 1993; 8(4):129-132.
19. Dryden I.L., Mardia K.V. Statistical Shape Analysis. Chichester: John Wiley&Sons Ltd, 1998. 376 p.
20. Zelditch M.L., Swiderski D.L., Sheets H.D. Geometric Morphometrics for Biologists. Oxford: Elsevier Science, 2004. 416 p.
21. Rohlf F.J. TpsDig, Version 1.23. NY: State Univ at Stony Brook, 2001. URL: http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/ morph. 29/01/2015
22. Rohlf F.J. TpsSuper, version 2.0. NY: State Univ at Stony Brook, 2013. URL: http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/ morph. 29/01/2015
23. Rohlf F.J. TPSrelw: relative warps, version 1.23. NY: State Univ at Stony Brook, 2001. URL:http://life. bio.sunysb.edu/morph. 29/01/2015
24. Pavlinov IIa. Geometric morphometrics of the skull of various murid rodents ( Mammalia, Rodentia): relation of the skull shape to the trophic specialization. Zh. Obshch. Biol. 2000; 61(6):583-600.
25. Rohlf F.J. TPSregr, version 1.23. NY: State Univat Stony Brook, 1998. URL: http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/ morph. 29/01/2015
26. Rohlf F.J. TPSsplin: thin plate spline, version 1.2. NY: State Univ at Stony Brook, 2004. URL:http://life. bio.sunysb.edu/morph. 29/01/2015
27. Goodall C.R. Procrustes methods in the statistical analysis of shapes. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B. 1991; 53:285-339.
28. Small C. The statistical theory of shape. NY: Springer, 1996. 227 p.
29. Rohlf F.J. et al. Morphometric spaces, shape components and the effect of linear transformations. In book: Advances in morphometrics. NY; L: Plenum Press, 1996. P. 131-152.
30. Costa L.D.F., Cesar R.M. Shape analysis and classification: theory and practice. Chicago: CRC Press, 2000. 659 p.
31. McCown T.D., Keith A. The Fossil Human Remains from the Levalloiso-Mousterian. In 2 vol. Vol. 2: The Stone Age of Mount Carmel. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1939. 390 p.
32. Sanfilippo P.G., Hewitt A.W., Mountain J.A., Mackey D.A. A Geometric Morphometric Assessment of Hand Shape and Comparison to the 2D:4D Digit Ratio as a Marker of Sexual Dimorphism. Twin Res. Hum. Genet. 2013; 16(2):590-600.
Review
For citations:
Ermolenko A.S., Filippova E.N., Khayrullin R.M., Khayrullin F.R. THE STUDY OF SEXUAL DIFFERENCES OF METACARPUS OF THE HUMAN HAND BY METHOD OF GEOMETRICAL MORPHOMETRY. Morphological newsletter. 2015;23(1):43-48. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20340/mv-mn.2015.0(1):43-48
Views:
293
