Adlî olgularda mesiodistal ve bukkolingual diş boyutlarından cinsiyet tespitinin geçerliliğinin saptanması

Yıl 2021, Sayı: 41, 78 - 86, 28.06.2021

Yeşim Doğan , Sema Aka

https://doi.org/10.33613/antropolojidergisi.907808

Cited By: 1

Öz

Ölümle sonuçlanan bir olayda araştırmanın ilk aşaması kimliklendirmedir. Adlî olgularda kimliklendirme çoğunlukla görsel yöntemlerle gerçekleştirilse de cesedin tanımlanamaz olduğu durumda, bu mümkün olmaz. Özellikle vücut bütünlüğünün bozulduğu, ileri derecede çürümenin gerçekleştiği ya da sadece iskeletin ele geçirilebildiği durumlarda kimliklendirme farklı disiplinlerin bir arada çalışmasını gerektirir. Kimliklendirmenin ilk aşaması cinsiyetin saptanmasıdır. Tüm iskelet elimizde olduğunda belirgin seksüel farklılıklar içeren kemiklerin varlığında rahatlıkla gerçekleştirilen cinsiyet tayini, özellikle pelvis ve kafatası parçalarının yokluğunda zorlu bir süreç haline gelir. Dişler dirençli yapıları gereği patlama, yangın ve benzeri zorlu koşulların olduğu olaylarda elimizde kalan tek delil olma özelliği taşımaktadır. Diş örneklerinden cinsiyet tayini, odontometri ve DNA analizleri ile gerçekleştirilir. Odontometri ile doğru sonuç alma oranı toplumda diş boyutlarında gözlenen seksüel dimorfizm oranı ile ilişkili olup, değişik toplumlarda farklılıklar göstermektedir. Bu çalışmada amaç Türkiye’de diş boyutlarında tespit edilmiş seksüel dimorfizm oranının adlî vakalarda uygulanabilirliğini DNA analizleri ile test etmektir. Ankara Hastanesi, 75. Yıl Ağız ve Diş Sağlığı Merkezi’nde çekilmiş 110 diş örneği kullanılarak gerçekleştirilen odontometrik analiz sonuçları, Türk toplumu verileri ile kıyaslanmış ve cinsiyetin belirlenmesinde mesiodistal (MD) boyutun erkeklerde %40, kadınlarda %71,67 ve bukkolingual (BL) boyutun da erkeklerde %42, kadınlarda %78,33 başarı oranı tespit edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak yaşları, cinsiyet ve sağlık durumları bilinmeyen insanlardan çekilen dişlerde cinsiyet belirlemede odontometrik yöntemin başarı oranının, adlî bilimlerde bu yöntemin kullanılmasına olanak vermeyecek ölçüde düşük olduğu belirlenmiştir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

odontometri, seksüel dimorfizm, DNA, amelogenin, kimliklendirme, adlî bilimler, cinsiyet saptama

Teşekkür

Diş örneklerinin bilimsel çalışmada kullanılmasına onay veren olgular ile çekilen 110 adet diş örneğinin tarafımıza ulaşmasında desteğini esirgemeyen Prof. Dr. Mehmet Ali Kılıçarslan’a teşekkür ederiz.

Authenticity of sex determination from mesiodistal and buccolingual tooth dimensions in forensic cases

Öz

Identification is the first step in cases of death investigation. Although it is mostly performed by visual methods in forensic cases, sometimes it is not possible due to the condition of the body. In cases that the body is highly degraded, decomposed or skeletonized, identification becomes a difficult, multidisciplinary procedure. Mostly, the first stage of the identification is sex determination. In the presence of entire skeleton, sex determination is easy due to the bones, that represents high sexual dimorphism but otherwise it is challenging especially in the absence of skull and pelvis. As teeth are the most durable part of our body, in cases of explosion, fire or similarly extreme conditions, they are the only evidence left to be evaluated. Determination of gender from tooth samples is performed with odontometry and DNA analysis. Odontometric sexual dimorphism has been detected at different rates in different populations. The aim of the current study is to evaluate if the sexual dimorphism rates in Turkish population is applicable for forensic cases. The results of the odontometric analysis performed using 110 tooth samples exracted at Ankara Hospital, Oral and Dental Health Center were compared with the Turkish population data, and the success rates in terms of sex determination were found to be 40%, for male and 71.67% for female for the mesiodistal (MD) dimension, and 42% for male and 78.33% for female for buccolingual (BL) dimension. As a result, odontometric analysis performed on tooth samples of unknown age, sex and health status do not give adequate sex determination rates to be used in forensic cases. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Odontometry, sexual dimorphism, DNA, amelogenin, identification, forensic sciences, sex determination

Kaynakça

• Aka, P. S., ve İşcan, M. Y. (2020). Diş sağlığı ve eğitimi bulguları ile kimliklendirme. Adli Bilimler Dergisi, 6(1), 79-82.
• Alt, K. W., Rösing, F. W., ve Nicola, M. T. (1998). Dental anthropology: Fundamentals, limits and prospects. Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-7496-8
• Angadi, P. V., Hemani, S., Prabhu, S., ve Acharya, A. B. (2013). Analyses of odontometric sexual dimorphism and sex assessment accuracy on a large a sample. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 20(6), 673-677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2013.03.040
• Archer, M. S., Bassed, R. B., Briggs, C. A., ve Lynch, M. J. (2005). Social isolation and delayed discovery of bodies in houses: The value of forensic pathology, anthropology, odontology and entomology in the medico-legal investigations. Forensic Science International, 151(2-3), 259-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2005.02.016
• Austin, D., ve King, R. E. (2016). The biological profile of unidentified human remains in a forensic context. Academic Forensic Pathology, 6(3), 370-390. https://doi.org/10.23907/2016.039
• Babu, S. S., Nair, S. S., Gopakumar, D., Kurian, N., Parameswar, A., ve Baby, T. K. (2016). Linear odontometric analysis of permanent dentition as a forensic aid: A retrospective study. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 10(5), ZC24–ZC28. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/18677.7741
• Bernstein, M. (1992). Forensic odontology. W. G. Eckert (Ed.) içinde, Introduction to forensic sciences, s. 295-342. CRC Press.
• Bilge, Y., Kedici, P. S., Doğan Alakoç, Y., Ülküer, Ü., ve İlkyaz, Y. (2003). The identification of a dismembered human body: A multidisciplinary approach. Forensic Science International, 137(2-3), 141-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(03)00334-7
• Bowers, C. M. (2004). Forensic dental evidence: An investigator’s handbook, s. 22-58. Elsevier Academic Press.
• Filho, I. E. M., Lopez-Capp, T. T., Biazevic, M. G. H., ve Michel-Crosato E. (2016). Sexual dimorphism using odontometric indexes: Analysis of three statistical techniques. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 44, 37-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2016.08.010
• Garn, S. M., Lewis, A. B., ve Kerewsky, R. S. (1964). Sex difference in tooth size. Journal of Dental Research, 43(2), 306. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345640430022401
• Garn, S. M., Lewis, A. B., ve Kerewsky, R. S. (1965a). X-linked inheritance of tooth size. Journal of Dental Research, 44(2), 439-441. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345650440022201
• Garn, S. M., Lewis, A. B., ve Kerewsky, R. S. (1965b). Size interrelationships of the mesial and distal teeth. Journal of Dental Research, 44(2), 350-354. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345650440020701
• Garn, S. M., Lewis, A. B., ve Kerewsky, R. S. (1966). Sexual dimorphism in the buccolingual tooth diameter. Journal of Dental Research, 45(6), 18-19. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345660450064301
• Garn, S. M., Lewis, A. B., Kerewsky, R. S., ve Jegart, K. (1965). Sex differences in intraindividual tooth-size communalities. Journal of Dental Research, 44(3), 476-479. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345650440030601
• Garn, S. M., Lewis, A. B., Swindler, D. R., ve Kerewsky, R. S. (1967). Genetic control of sexual dimorphism in tooth size. Journal of Dental Research, 46(5), 963-972. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345670460055801
• Harris, E. F., Hicks, J. D., ve Barcroft, B. D. (2001). Tissue contributions to sex and race: Differences in tooth crown size of deciduous molars. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 115(3), 223-237. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1077
• Hillson, S. (1986). Teeth, s. 107-109. Cambridge University Press.
• Hillson, S., Fitzgerald, C., ve Flinn, H. (2004). Alternative dental measurements: Proposals and relationships with other measurements. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 126(4), 413-426. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.10430
• İşcan, M. Y., ve Kedici, P. S. (2003). Sexual variation in bucco-lingual dimensions in Turkish dentition. Forensic Science International, 137(2), 160-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(03)00349-9
• İşcan, M. Y., ve Miller-Shaivitz, P. (1984). Determination of sex from the tibia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 64(1), 53-57. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330640104
• Kaushal, S., Patnaik, V. V. G., ve Agnihotri, G. (2003). Mandibular canines in sex determination. Journal of the Anatomical Society of India, (52),119-124.
• Kedici, P. S., ve İşcan, M. Y. (2004). Diş boyutundan cinsiyet tayini. Adli Bilimler Dergisi, 3(1), 61-66.
• Kieser, J. A., Groeneveld, H. T., ve Silva, P. C. F. (1997). Dental assmmetry, maternal obesity and smoking. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 102(1), 133-139. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-8644(199701)102:1%3C133::AID-AJPA11%3E3.0.CO;2-1
• Kondo, S., Townsend, G. C., ve Eisaku, K. (2005). Size relationships among permanent mandibular molars in Aborginal Australians and Papua New Guinea highlanders. American Journal of Human Biology, 17(5), 622-633. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajhb.20418
• Krogman, W. M, ve İşcan, M. Y. (1986). The human skeleton in forensic medicine, s. 352-375. Charles C. Thomas.
• Larsen, C. S. (1997). Bioarcheology. Interpreting behaviour from human skeleton. Cambridge University Pres. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802676
• St. Hoyme, L. E., ve İşcan, M. Y. (1989). Determination of sex and race: accuracy and assumptions. M. Y. İşcan ve K. A. R. Kennedy (Ed.) içinde, Reconstruction of life from the skeleton, s. 53-93. Alan R Liss.
• Ling, J. Y. K, ve Wong, R. W. K. (2007). Tooth dimensions of southern Chinese. HOMO, 58(1), 67-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchb.2006.08.003
• Lysell, L., ve Myrberg, N. (1982). Mesiodistal tooth size in the deciduous and permanent dentitions. European Journal of Orthodontics, 4(2), 113-122. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/4.2.113
• Macho, G. A. (1990). Is sexual dimorphism in the femur a “population specific phenomenon”? Zeitschrift Für Morphologie und Anthropologie, 78(2), 229-242. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25757286
• Mays, S. (1998). Archeology of human bones, s. 42-206. Routledge.
• Mergen, A. B., ve İşcan, M. Y. (2007). Kitle mezarlarında bulunan uzun kemiklerden cinsiyet tayini. Adli Bilimler Dergisi, 6(1), 7-16.
• Moorrees, C. F. A, ve Reed, R. B. (1964).Correlations among crown diameters of human teeth. Archives of Oral Biology, 9(6), 685-697. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9969(64)90080-9
• Novotny, V., İşcan, M. Y., ve Loth, S. R. (1993). Morphologic and osteometric assessment of age, sex and race from the skull. M. Y. İşcan ve R. P. Hemler (Ed.) içinde, Forensic Analysis of The Skull, s. 71-88. Wiley Liss Inc.
• Owsley, D. W. (1982). Dental discriminant sexing of Arikara skeletons. Plains Anthropologist, 27(96), 165-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/2052546.1982.11909107
• Prabhu, S., ve Acharya, A. B. (2009). Odontometric sex assessment in Indians. Forensic Science International, 192(1-3), 129.e1-129.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.08.008
• Purkait, R., ve Chandra, H. (2002). Sexual dimorphism in femora: An Indian study. Forensic Science Communications, 4(3). https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/july2002/purkait.htm
• Rao, N. G, Pai, N. L., ve Rao, N. N. (1988). Mandibular canines in establishing sex identity. Journal of Indian Forensic Medicine, 10(5), 22-26.
• Shankar, S., Anuthama, K., Kruthika, M., Kumar, V. S., Ramesh, K., Jaheerdeen, A., ve Yasin, M. M. (2013). Identifying sexual dimorphism in a paediatric South Indian population using stepwise discriminant function analysis. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 20(6), 752-756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2013.04.009
• Sherfudhin, H., Abdullah, M., ve Khan, N. A. (1996). Cross-sectional study of canine dimorphism in establishing sex identity: comparison of two statistical methods. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 23(9), 627-631. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1996.tb00902.x
• Schwartz, T. R., ve Dean, M. C. (2005). Sexual dimorphism in modern human permanent teeth. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 128(2), 312-317. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.20211
• Scott, G. R., ve Turner II, C. G. (1998). Dental anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 17, 99-126. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.17.100188.000531
• Pettenati-Soubayroux, I. P., Signoli, M., ve Dutour, O. (2002). Sexual dimorphism in teeth: Discriminatory effectiveness of permanent lower canine size observed in a XVIIIth century osteological series. Forensic Science Internatioanal, 126(3), 227-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(02)00080-4
• Spradley, M. K. (2016). Metric methods for the biological profile in forensic anthropology: Sex, ancestry and stature. Academic Forensic Pathology, 6(3), 391-399. https://doi.org/10.23907/2016.040
• Tracey, M. (2001). Short tandem repeat-based identification of individuals and parents. Croatian Medical Journal, 42(3), 233-238.
• Yen, M. Y, Yen, T. C., Pong, C. Y., Liu, J. H., Wei, Y. H. (1992). Mitochondrial DNA mutation in Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy. Investigative Ophtalmology & Visual Science, 33(8), 2561-2566.
• Zorba, E., Moraitis, K., ve Manolis, S. (2011). Sexual dimorphism in permanent teeth of modern Greeks. Forensic Science International, 210(1-3), 74-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.02.001