SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Anatomy / 2019 / Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 2

Fingerprint pattern similarity: a family-based study using novel classification

Eric O. Aigbogun JR
Chinagorom P. IBEACHU
Ann M. LEMUEL
Journal
Anatomy
Pages
107–115
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Chi-square analysis was used to testdistribution differences, while a pedigree tree was designed for the offspring’s similarity to the parents.Results: In this study, loop (L) was consistently predominant both as single (>60%) and combined distribution (>75%), followedby whorl (

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:: Establishing that certain traits are inherited can be assessed from the extent of morphological similarity of theoffspring and their parents.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The fingerprints; arch (A), loop (L), and whorl (W) were identified and a novel classification (A, L, W,AL, AW, and LW) for heredity study as described by Aigbogun et al.(2018) was adopted.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Chi-square analysis was used to testdistribution differences, while a pedigree tree was designed for the offspring’s similarity to the parents.Results: In this study, loop (L) was consistently predominant both as single (>60%) and combined distribution (>75%), followedby whorl (
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

: Establishing that certain traits are inherited can be assessed from the extent of morphological similarity of theoffspring and their parents. This study, evaluated the pattern similarity of the fingerprint of offspring to that of their parentsusing a novel classification.Methods: Fifty families (comprising of father, mother and a child) without ethnic considerations were recruited and digital fingerprints were obtained. The fingerprints; arch (A), loop (L), and whorl (W) were identified and a novel classification (A, L, W,AL, AW, and LW) for heredity study as described by Aigbogun et al.(2018) was adopted. Chi-square analysis was used to testdistribution differences, while a pedigree tree was designed for the offspring’s similarity to the parents.Results: In this study, loop (L) was consistently predominant both as single (>60%) and combined distribution (>75%), followedby whorl (

🔖

Cite This Article

JR, E. O. A., IBEACHU, C. P., LEMUEL, A. M. (2022). Fingerprint pattern similarity: a family-based study using novel classification. Anatomy, Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 2, 107–115. https://ajindex.com/articles/439448

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Nature. Disease genetics. Springer Nature [Internet]. [Revised on August 8, 2018] Available from: https://www.nature.com/subjects/ disease-genetics
  2. Weiling F. Historical study: Johann Gregor Mendel 1822–1884. Am J Med Genet 1991;40:1–25
  3. Griffiths AJF, Miller JH., Suzuki DT, Lewontin RC, Gelbart WM. Genetics and the organism. In: An introduction to genetic analysis. 7th ed. New York (NY): W. H. Freeman [Internet]. [Revised on September 10, 2000]; Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ books/NBK21766/ 4. Balgir RS. Dermatoglyphics in cleft lip and cleft palate anomalies. Indian Pediatrics 1993;30:341–6
  4. Platilová H, Pôbisová Z, Zamrazil V, Vondra K, Dvoráková L. Dermatoglyphics – an attempt to predict diabetes. [Article in Czech] Vnitr Lek 1996;42:757–60
  5. Gupta A, Karjodkar FR. Role of dermatoglyphics as an indicator of precancerous and cancerous lesions of the oral cavity. Contemp Clin Dent 2013;4:448–53
  6. Mathew L, Hegde AM, Rai K. Dermatoglyphic peculiarities in children with oral clefts. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2005;23:179–82
  7. Bhat G, Mukhdoomi M, Shah B, Ittoo MS. Dermatoglyphics: in health and disease – a review. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences 2014;2:31–4
  8. Kumari L, Babu V, Kumar V. Dermatoglyphics and its relation to intelligence levels of young students. IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences 2014;13:1–3
  9. Lakshmana N, Nayyar AS, Pavani BV, Ratnam MVR, Upendra G. Revival of dermatoglyphics: syndromes and disorders, a review. Advances in Human Biology 2017;7:2–7
  10. Cummins H, Midlo C. Palmar and plantar epidermal ridge configurations (dermatoglyphics) in European Americans. Am J Phys Anthropol 1926;9:471–502
  11. Cummins H, Midlo C. Finger prints, palms and soles: an introduction to dermatoglyphics. New York (NY): Dover Publication Incorporation; 1943. p. 336
  12. Stoney DA. Measurement of fingerprint individuality. In: Lee HC, Gaensslen RE, editors. Advances in fingerprint technology. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2001. p. 327–87
  13. Ali AHM, Gaikwad AT. Multimodal biometrics enhancement recognition system based on fusion of fingerprint and palm print: a review. Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology: F Graphics & Vision 2016;15:13–26
  14. Jain AK. Uniqueness of fingerprints. Sackler colloquium on forensic science: the nexus of science and law. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences; 2005
  15. Bose PK, Kabir MJ. Fingerprint: a unique and reliable method for identifi