THE MODULARITY OF THE FINGERS AS A SOURCE OF MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATIONS OF THE HUMAN HAND'S SHAPE DEPENDING ON SEX

According to the latest achievements in animal morphology and paleo-morphology, the phenomena of modularity and integration are quite closely interconnected, while morphological integration describes the extent to which various structural features are related to each other in the process of morphogenesis, while modularity reflects the rate of evolutionary transformation, which determines the degree of this conjugation. One of the classical objects of study of modularity and integration in morphology is regularly segmented skeletal structures, in particular, the hand. In humans, the hand is characterized mainly by the ratio of the lengths of the index and ring fingers, while their position and the value that determines the structure of the hand as a whole in the space of its shape has not yet been studied. In this paper, the influence of the modules of the fingers on the shape of the hand in the framework of their morphological integration was determined, which became the main goal of the study. The method of geometric morphometry of digital images of radiographs of the right hands of 100 people was used, on which the coordinates of 16 landmarks of the phalanges of the II-V fingers were determined, followed by a study of the shape, covariance and modularity. The results showed that changes in the shape of the hand are due to the position of the II-V fingers in space, with the ulnar type of the hand (2d<4d) there is a displacement of the II-III fingers in space in the distal direction and IV-V fingers in the proximal direction, with the radial type of the hand (2d>4d) reverse transformations in space are observed. The position of the second finger in space largely affects the shape of the hand as a whole. An analysis of the modularity of the fingers indicates a significant integration between them, compared with the integration of other modules of the hand. The high values of covariance revealed as a result of the study in pairwise comparison of the modules of the fingers and lower values of covariance in the multiple comparison between the modules of the hand indicate a different degree of local influence of morphogenetic factors on the structural features and shape of the hand in people of different sexes.

1. Klingenberg CP, Marugán-Lobón J. Evolutionary covariation in geometric morphometric data: analyzing integration, modularity, and allometry in a phylogenetic context. Syst Biol. 2013;62(4):591-610. DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syt025

2. Olson EC, Miller RL. Morphological integration. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958.- 376 pp

3. Adams DC, Felice RN. Assessing trait covariation and morphological integration on phylogenies using evolutionary covariance matrices. PLoS One. 2014;9(4):e94335. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094335

4. Esteve-Altava B. Challenges in identifying and interpreting organizational modules in morphology. J Morphol. 2017;278(7):960-974. DOI: 10.1002/jmor.20690

5. Zelditch ML, Goswami A. What does modularity mean? Evol Dev. 2021;23(5):377-403. DOI: 10.1111/ede.12390

6. Claverie T, Patek SN. Modularity and rates of evolutionary change in a power-amplified prey capture sys-tem. Evolution. 2013;67(11):3191-207. DOI: 10.1111/evo.12185

7. Klingenberg CP. Studying morphological integration and modularity at multiple levels: concepts and analysis. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2014;369(1649):20130249. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0249

8. Glimm T, Bhat R, Newman SA. Multiscale modeling of vertebrate limb development. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med. 2020;12(4):e1485. DOI: 10.1002/wsbm.1485

9. Woltering JM, Meyer A. The phantoms of a high-seven - or - why do our thumbs stick out? Front Zool. 2015;12:23. DOI: 10.1186/s12983-015-0117-x

10. Chavez TJ, Morrell NT. The Evolution of the Human Hand From an Anthropologic Perspective. J Hand Surg Am. 2022;47(2):181-185. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2021.07.006

11. Molnar J, Esteve-Altava B, Rolian C, Diogo R. Comparison of musculoskeletal networks of the primate forelimb. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):10520. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-09566-7

12. Rothier PS, Simon MN, Marroig G et al. Development and function explain the modular evolution of phalanges in gecko lizards. Proc Biol Sci. 2022;289(1966):20212300. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2021.2300

13. Khayrullin RM. Effektivnost' indeksov fluktuiruyushchey asimmetrii dlya otsenki morfologicheskikh priznakov cheloveka. Morfologicheskie vedomosti. 2002;1-2:52-54 In Russain

14. McGrew WC, Schiefenhövel W, Marchant LF. Introduction to the evolution of human handedness. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2013;1288:252. DOI: 10.1111/nyas.12111

15. Putz RV, Tuppek A. Evolution der Hand [Evolution of the hand]. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 1999;31(6):357-361. DOI: 10.1055/s-1999-13552

16. Patel BA, Maiolino SA. Morphological Diversity in the Digital Rays of Primate Hands. In book: The Evolution of the Primate Hand. Anatomical, Developmental, Functional, and Paleontological Evidence. Ed. by T. Kivell, P. Lemelin, B. Richmond, D. Schmitt. New York: Springer, 2016.- P. 55-100. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3646-5_4

17. Preuschoft H, Chivers DJ. Hands of Primates. Vienna: Springer-Verlag, 1993.- 430 pp

18. Panchal-Kildare S, Malone K. Skeletal anatomy of the hand. Hand Clin. 2013;29(4):459-471. DOI: 10.1016/j.hcl.2013.08.001

19. Napier JR, Napier PH. A handbook of living primates. London: Academic Press, 1967.- 456 pp

20. Manning JT, Fink B. Digit Ratio. In book: Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science. Ed. by T.K. Shackelford, V.A. Weekes-Shackelford. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland AG, 2021.- P. 4300-4302. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-19650-3_3829

21. Khaĭrullin R. Segmental 2:4 digit ratio. Unilateral, bilateral and hand-type differences in men. Homo. 2011;62(6):478-486. DOI: 10.1016/j.jchb.2011.09.001

22. Khayrullin RM, Fomina AV, Aynullova NK. Variabel'nost' znacheniy 2d:4d pal'tsevogo indeksa u dikikh i laboratornykh zhivotnykh. Fundamental'nye issledovaniya. 2013;6-3:611-618. In Russian

23. Khayrullin RM, Filippova EN, Butov AA. i dr. Lineynye zavisimosti znacheniy pal'tsevogo (2d:4d) in-deksa u lits muzhskogo pola. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 23: Antropologiya. 2011;2:16-24. In Russian

24. Khayrullin RM. Morfologicheskie tipy kisti v yunosheskom periode individual'nogo razvitiya. Morfolo-gicheskie vedomosti. 200 1;1-2:103-105. In Russian

25. Robertson J, Zhang W, Liu JJ, Muir KR, Maciewicz RA, Doherty M. Radiographic assessment of the in-dex to ring finger ratio (2D:4D) in adults. J Anat. 2008;212(1):42-48. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2007.00830.x

26. Sineva IM, Baholdina VYu. Osteologicheskie dannye k probleme antropologicheskogo izucheniya kisti cheloveka. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Seria 23. Antropologia. 2012(2):4-16. URL: http://bulletin.antropos.msu.ru/files/ver%202012%2002%20page%20%20004_016.pdf In Russian

27. Filippova EN, Khayrullin RM. Individual'naya izmenchivost' morfometricheskikh parametrov pal'tsevykh dermatoglifov kisti. Morfologiya. 2001;120(4):87-88. In Russian

28. Rohlf FJ. The tps series of software. Hystrix, It J Mamm. 2015;26:9-12. DOI: 10.4404/hystrix-26.1-11264

29. Klingenberg CP. MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Mol Ecol Re-sour. 2011;11(2):353-357. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02924.x

30. Adams DC, Rohlf FJ, Slice DE. A field comes of age: geometric morphometrics in the 21st century. Hys-trix, It J Mamm. 2013;24(1):7-14. DOI: 10.4404/hystrix-24.1-6283

31. Mitteroecker P, Gunz P. Advances in Geometric Morphometrics. Evol Biol. 2009;36:235-247. DOI: 10.1007/s11692-009-9055-x

32. Cooke SB, Terhune CE. Form, function, and geometric morphometrics. Anat Rec (Hoboken). 2015;298(1):5-28. DOI: 10.1002/ar.23065

33. Bookstein FL. Combining the Tools of Geometric Morphometrics. In book: Advances in Morphometrics (NATO ASI Series, Series A: Life Sciences). Ed. by L.F Marcus, M. Corti, A. Loy, G.J.P. Naylor, D.E. Vol. 284.- Boston: Springer, 1996.- P. 131-135. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4757-9083-2_12

34. Pavlinov IJa, Mikeshina NG. Principy i metody geometricheskoj morfometrii. Zh Obshch Biol. 2002;63(6):473-493. In Russian

35. Klingenberg CP. Size, shape, and form: concepts of allometry in geometric morphometrics. Dev Genes Evol. 2016;226(3):113-137. DOI: 10.1007/s00427-016-0539-2

36. Zelditch ML, Swiderski DL, Sheets HD. Geometric morphometrics for biologists: A primer. San Diego: Elsevier Academic Press, 2012.- 488 pp

37. Abdi H, Williams LJ. Partial least squares methods: partial least squares correlation and partial least square regression. Methods Mol Biol. 2013;930:549-579. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-62703-059-5_23

38. von Cramon-Taubadel N. Patterns of integration and modularity in the primate skeleton: a review. J Anthropol Sci. 2022;100. DOI: 10.4436/JASS.10012

39. Klingenberg CP. Morphometric integration and modularity in configurations of landmarks: tools for evaluating a priori hypotheses. Evol Dev. 2009;11(4):405-421. DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-142X.2009.00347.x

40. Mitteroecker P, Bookstein F. The conceptual and statistical relationship between modularity and morpho-logical integration. Syst Biol. 2007;56(5):818-836. DOI: 10.1080/10635150701648029