Sex and ancestry patterning of residual correlations in human dental development: Cooperative genetic interaction and phenotypic plasticity
Sex and ancestry patterning of residual correlations in human dental development: Cooperative genetic interaction and phenotypic plasticity
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/ajpa.24908
复制
发表时间：
2024-02-08
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Sgheiza，Valerie
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sgheiza，Valerie
大多数人类牙龄估计的研究都集中在年龄的点估计上，而大多数关于牙齿发育理论的研究都集中在形态学或萌出上。使用顺序分期的牙齿发育之间的相关性受到较少的关注。人口统计变量对这些相关性的影响是未知的。我用协同遗传互作（CGI）的透镜检验了参考样本人口统计学变量对残差相关矩阵的影响。牙科研究杂志，1963年，42，1490-1502，880名伦敦3-22.99岁儿童的全景X线照片的左下颌恒牙评分，按年龄、性别和孟加拉国或欧洲血统分层。多变量累积概率单位模型适用于每个性别/血统组（n= 220），每个性别或血统（n= 440），和所有个体（n= 880）。从9个参考样本配置的残差相关矩阵进行了比较，使用Bartlett的测试之间的差异矩阵对身份矩阵，层次聚类分析，和树状图同表相关性。聚类分析表明，聚类的牙齿类，类内的位置，和发展的时间。聚类模式和树状图的相关性显示相似的性别，但不是ancestry.DiscussionExpectations的CGI支持发展分期。这支持使用CGI作为解释牙列内变异模式的模型。性别被发现产生一致的模式的牙齿相关性，而祖先没有。聚类的发展时间支持表型可塑性的牙列，并建议共享的遗传祖先的环境来解释人口差异。
ObjectivesMost research in human dental age estimation has focused on point estimates of age, and most research on dental development theories has focused on morphology or eruption. Correlations between developing teeth using ordinal staging have received less attention. The effect of demographic variables on these correlations is unknown. I tested the effect of reference sample demographic variables on the residual correlation matrix using the lens of cooperative genetic interaction (CGI).Materials and MethodsThe sample consisted of Moorrees et al.,Journal of Dental Research, 1963, 42, 1490–1502, scores of left mandibular permanent teeth from panoramic radiographs of 880 London children 3–22.99 years of age stratified by year of age, sex, and Bangladeshi or European ancestry. A multivariate cumulative probit model was fit to each sex/ancestry group (n= 220), each sex or ancestry (n= 440), and all individuals (n= 880). Residual correlation matrices from nine reference sample configurations were compared using Bartlett's tests of between‐sample difference matrices against the identity matrix, hierarchical cluster analysis, and dendrogram cophenetic correlations.ResultsBartlett's test results were inconclusive. Cluster analysis showed clustering by tooth class, position within class, and developmental timing. Clustering patterns and dendrogram correlations showed similarity by sex but not ancestry.DiscussionExpectations of CGI were supported for developmental staging. This supports using CGI as a model for explaining patterns of variation within the dentition. Sex was found to produce consistent patterns of dental correlations, whereas ancestry did not. Clustering by timing of development supports phenotypic plasticity in the dentition and suggests shared environment over genetic ancestry to explain population differences.