The uniqueness of the human anterior dentition: A geometric morphometric analysis

Journal of Forensic Sciences

Volumn 52, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 671-677

  Kieser, Jules A ^a   Bernal, Valeria ^b   Neil Waddell, John ^a   Raju, Shilpa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

^b FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS NATURALES Y MUSEO   (Argentina)

Author keywords

Bitemark analysis; Forensic odontology; Forensic science; Semilandmarks; Tooth size and shape

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; BITEMARK; CANINE TOOTH; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; DENTISTRY; DENTITION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INCISOR; MALE; MORPHOMETRICS; ORTHODONTICS; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEX DIFFERENCE; TOOTH SIZE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; DENTITION; FEMALE; FORENSIC DENTISTRY; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; SEX CHARACTERISTICS;

EID: 34247368054     PISSN: 00221198     EISSN: 15564029     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2007.00403.x     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Vale GL. History of bitemark evidence. In : Dorion RBJ, editor. Bitemark evidence. New York : Marcel Dekker, 2005 : 1 29.
2. Pretty IA, Sweet D. The scientific basis for human bitemark analyses - a critical review. Sci Justice 2001 41 : 85 92.
3. Kieser JA. Weighing bitemark evidence: a postmodern perspective. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 2005 1 : 75 80.
4. Pretty IA. Reliability of bitemark evidence. In : Dorion RBJ, editor. Bitemark evidence. New York : Marcel Dekker, 2005 : 531 63.
5. Sweet D, Pretty IA. A look at forensic dentistry - Part 2. Teeth as weapons of violence - identification of bitemark perpetrators. Br Dent J 2001 190 : 415 8.
6. MacFarlane TW, MacDonald DG, Sutherland DA. Statistical problems in dental identification. J Forensic Sci Soc 1974 14 : 247 52.
7. Sognnaes RF, Rawson RD, Gratt BM, Nguyen NBT. Computer comparison of bitemark patterns in identical twins. J Am Dent Assoc 1982 105 : 449 51.
8. Rawson RD, Ommen RK, Kinard G, Johnson J, Yfantis A. Statistical evidence for the individuality of the human dentition. J Forensic Sci 1984 43 : 245 53.
9. Bookstein FL. Landmark methods for forms without landmarks: localizing group differences in outline shape. Med Image Anal 1997 1 : 225 43.
10. Robinson DL, Blackwell PG, Stillman EC, Brook AH. Planar procrustes analysis of tooth shape. Arch Oral Biol 2001 46 : 191 9.
11. Kieser JA, Groeneveld HT, McKee J, Cameron N. Measurement error in human dental mensuration. Ann Hum Biol 1990 17 : 523 8.
12. Adams DC, Rohlf FJ, Slice DE. Geometric morphometrics: ten years of progress following the 'revolution'. Ital J Zool 2004 71 : 5 16.
13. Kendall DG. The diffusion of shape. Advances Appl Prob 1977 9 : 428 30.
14. Bookstein FL. Morphometric tools for landmark data: geometry and biology. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1991.
15. Rohlf FJ. Tps series software. Ecology and Evolution, SUNY at Stony Brook, Available at, 2004.
16. Bookstein FL, Streissguth AP, Sampson PD, Connor PD, Barr HM. Corpus callosum shape and neurophysiological deficits in adult males with heavy fetal alcohol exposure. NeuroImage 2002 15 : 233 51.
17. Green WDK. The thin-plate spline and images with curving features. In : Mardia KV, Gill CA, Dryden IL, editors. Proceedings in image fusion and shape variability techniques. Leeds : Leeds University Press, 1996 : 79 87.
18. Sheets HD, Keonho K, Mitchell CE. A combined landmark and outline-based approach to ontogenetic shape change in the Ordovician Trilobite Triarthrus becki. In : Elewa A, editor. Applications of morphometrics in paleontology and biology. New York : Springer, 2004 : 67 81.
19. Rohlf FJ. Relative warps analysis and an example of its application to Mosquito wings. In : Marcus LF, Bello E, García-Valdecasas A, editors. Contributions to morphometrics. Madrid : Monografías del Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, 1993 : 132 59.
20. Rohlf FJ, Bookstein FL. Computing the uniform component of shape variation. Syst Biol 2003 52 : 66 9.
21. Sheets HD. IMP-integrated morphometrics package. Buffalo, New York : Department of Physics, Canisius College, 2003.
22. Goodall C. Procrustes methods in the statistical analysis of shape. J Roy Stat Soc B 1991 53 : 285 339.
23. Dayan T, Wool D, Simberloff D. Variation and covariation of skulls and teeth: modern carnivores and the interpretation of fossil mammals. Paleobiology 2002 28 : 508 26.
24. Dempsey PJ, Townsend GC, Martin NG, Neale MC. Genetic covariance of incisor crown size in twins. J Dent Res 1995 74 : 1389 98.
25. Bookstein FL, Streissguth AP, Sampson PD, Connor PD, Barr HM. Corpus callosum shape and neuropsychological deficits in adult males with heavy fetal alcohol exposure. NeuroImage 2003 15 : 233 51.
26. Rohlf FJ, Corti M. The use of two-block partial least-squares to study covariation in shape. Syst Zool 2000 49 : 740 53.
27. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979 2 : 420 8.
28. Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 2nd ed. New York : John Wiley, 1981.
29. Taupin JM. Forensic hair morphology comparison - a dying art or junk science? Sci Justice 2004 44 : 95 100.
30. Saferstein R. Criminaslistics - an introduction to forensic science. 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Prentice-Hall, 1995.
31. Pollak J. US v Plaza, Acosta and Rodriquez Cr. No. 98-362-10,11,12, District Court of Pennsylvania, Order 13 March, 2002.
32. Grieve M, Wiggins K. Fibres under fire: suggestions for improving their use to provide forensic evidence. J Forensic Sci 2001 46 : 835 43.
33. Sweet D, Bowers CM. Accuracy of bite mark overlays: a comparison of five common methods to produce exemplars from a suspect's dentition. J Forensic Sci 1998 43 : 362 67.
34. State v. Garrison, 120 Arizona 255,585 P.2d 563.
35. Naru AS. Methods for the analysis of human bitemarks. Forensic Sci Rev 1995 9 : 123 39.
36. Aksu MN, Gobetti JP. The past and present legal weight of bitemarks as evidence. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 1996 17 : 136 40.
37. Kieser JA. Human adult odontometrics. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1990.
38. Lucas PW. Dental functional morphology. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2004.
39. Kieser JA, Tompkins GR, Buckingham D, Firth NA, Swain MV. Bitemarks: presentation, analysis and evidential reliability. Forensic Path Rev 2005 3 : 157 79.
40. Kittelson JM, Kieser JA, Buckingham DM, Herbison GP. Weighing evidence: qualitative measures of the importance of bitemark evidence. J Odonto-Stomatol 2002 20 : 31 7.
41. Budowle B, Buscaglia JA, Schwartz-Perlman R. Review of the scientific basis for friction ridge comparisons as a means of identification: committee findings and recommendations. Forensic Sci Comm 2006 8 : 1 11.
42. Bernal V. Size and shape analysis of human molars: comparing traditional and geometric morphometric techniques. J Comp Hum Biol, in press.