Geometric Morphometric Analysis of the Human Hand Morphology Based on X-ray Imaging
https://doi.org/10.18499/2225-7357-2023-12-1-29-36
Abstract
Currently, in humans, the ratio of the index and ring fingers (2D:4D ratio) determines the morphological type of the hand: type 1 or radial (2D>4D), type 2 or neutral (2D=4D), type 3 or ulnar (2D<4D). However, the above differences do not allow for morphological verification of the hand shape as a whole.
The aim of the study was to inspect the hand shapes depending on its morphology based on radiographical images with geometric morphometric methods.
Material and methods. Geometric morphometry included an analysis of the right hand shape described by 20 landmarks located on digital radiographic images (anteriorposterior projection) in 50 males and 50 females. Each hand was classified according to whether the index finger was longer, equal to, or shorter than the ring finger by visual assessment.
Results. The study revealed differences between the hand shapes in the transverse direction, namely, the hands of the ulnar type (U) were wider, while the hands of the radial type (R) were narrower. The hands of neutral shape, unlike the other two types, were more oval in shape. In average, the hand shape depended on the morphological type. The most pronounced shape transformations were due to the geometry of the metacarpal bones in the transverse direction, and due to the geometry of the II, IV and V fingers in the longitudinal direction. Intergroup differences in width were revealed between the group of hands of radial (R)-neutral (N) types and ulnar (U) type, and in length between the group of hands of radial (R)-ulnar (U) types and neutral (N) type. The allometry of the hand shape was minimal.
Conclusion. The results of the study demonstrate the potentials of geometric morphometry for analysis of the human hand shapes and their variability depending on the morphological type.
About the Author
A. S. Ermolenko
Honored Doctor of Russia E.M. Chuchkalov Ulyanovsk Regional Clinical Center for Specialized Types of Medical Care
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Aleksandr S. Ermolenko – doctor
ul. Kryukina, 28, Ulyanovsk, 432071
References
1. Pavlinov IYa, Mikeshina NG. Printsipy i metody geometricheskoi morfometrii. Journal Of General Biology. 2002;63(6):473–93. (In Russ.).
2. Sineva IM, Baholdina VYu. Osteological Data to the Anthropological Investigation of Human Hand. Lomonosov Journal Of Anthropology (Moscow University Anthropology Bulletin). 2012;2:4-16.
3. Adams DC, Rohlf FJ, Slice DE. Geometric morphometrics: Ten years of progress following the “revolution.” Italian Journal of Zoology. 2004 Jan;71(1):5–16. doi: 10.1080/11250000409356545
4. Barrett CK, Case DT. Use of 2D:4D Digit Ratios to Determine Sex. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 2014 Feb 19;59(5):1315–20. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.12450
5. Blincoe H. Significant types of hands related to distal extent of digits. The Anatomical Record. 1959 Mar;133(3):527–35. doi: 10.1002/ar.1091330306
6. Cooper KL. Developmental and Evolutionary Allometry of the Mammalian Limb Skeleton. Integrative and Comparative Biology. 2019 Jun 10;59(5):1356–68. doi: 10.1093/icb/icz082
7. Guéro S. Developmental biology of the upper limb. Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation. 2018 Oct;37(5):265–74. doi: 10.1016/j.hansur.2018.03.007
8. Kalichman L, Batsevich V, Kobyliansky E. 2D:4D finger length ratio and radiographic hand osteoarthritis. Rheumatology International. 2017 Oct 20;38(5):865–70. doi: 10.1007/s00296-017-3831-1
9. Klingenberg CP, MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2010 Oct 5;11(2):353–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02924.x
10. Klingenberg CP. Size, shape, and form: concepts of allometry in geometric morphometrics. Development Genes and Evolution. 2016 Apr 1;226(3):113–37. doi: 10.1007/s00427-016-0539-2
11. Klingenberg CP. Walking on Kendall’s Shape Space: Understanding Shape Spaces and Their Coordinate Systems. Evolutionary Biology. 2020 Aug 18;47(4). doi: 10.1007/s11692-020-09513-x
12. Landi F, O’Higgins P. Applying Geometric Morphometrics to Digital Reconstruction and Anatomical Investigation. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology. 2019;1171:55–71. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-24281-7_6
13. Lau K, Tao H, Liu H, Wen J, Sturgeon K, Sorfazlian N, et al. Anisotropic stress orients remodelling of mammalian limb bud ectoderm. Nature Cell Biology. 2015 Apr 20;17(5):569–79. doi: 10.1038/ncb3156
14. Manning JT, Fink B. Digit Ratio. Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science. 2018;1–12. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_3829-1
15. Neha. Sizing the Shape: Understanding Morphometrics. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2015;9:ZC21-6. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/8971.5458
16. Outomuro D, Johansson F. A potential pitfall in studies of biological shape: Does size matter? Behmer S, editor. Journal of Animal Ecology. 2017 Sep 6;86(6):1447–57. doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12732
17. Pélabon C, Firmat C, Bolstad GH, Voje KL, Houle D, Cassara J, et al. Evolution of morphological allometry. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2014 Jun 9;1320(1):58–75. doi: 10.1111/nyas.12470
18. Rohlf FJ. The tps series of software. Hystrix. It. J. Mamm. 2015;26(1):9-12. doi: 10.4404/hystrix-26.1-11264
19. Sheeba CJ, Andrade RP, Palmeirim I. Mechanisms of vertebrate embryo segmentation: Common themes in trunk and limb development. Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology. 2016 Jan;49:125–34. doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2016.01.010
20. Tickle C. How the embryo makes a limb: determination, polarity and identity. Journal of Anatomy. 2015 Aug 7;227(4):418–30. doi: 10.1111/joa.12361
Review
For citations:
Ermolenko A.S. Geometric Morphometric Analysis of the Human Hand Morphology Based on X-ray Imaging. Journal of Anatomy and Histopathology. 2023;12(1):29-36. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18499/2225-7357-2023-12-1-29-36
Views:
453
Email this article 