Sexual dimorphism in mandibular growth of French‐Canadian children 6 to 10 years of age

Buschang, Peter H.; Tanguay, R.; Demirjian, A; Palme, L. La

doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330710105

Cited by 22 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Parameter 8 measuring mouth height shows little change in either sex, and this may be related to the need, early in life, for a sphincter for suckling and subsequent change of function to a slit for access for food conveyed by finger and thumb. The other parameter that grows little in girls, 9 (chin height), agrees with the recent findings of Buschang et al (1986). All other simple facial parameters in this study grow well, as is demonstrated by the means and the proportionate development when expressed as percentages ( Table 3).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 92%

Developmental changes in the facial soft tissues

Burke

Hughes-Lawson

1989

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Short-base stereophotogrammetry was used to study differential growth and development of the soft tissues of the face. Thirteen facial parameters were measured at ages 9, 11, 13, 15, and 16 years on 170 facial contour maps selected from a mixed longitudinal study of 26 boys and 26 girls. Each parameter was measured three-dimensionally, and its developmental progress at the earlier stages was expressed as a percentage of its value at 16 years of age. Standing height development was assessed in the same way. Three parameters that measured soft tissues surrounding the eyes grew little but were very advanced in their development, following a "neural" pattern. The remaining facial parameters grew more but were less advanced, and standing height was least advanced. There appeared to be three separate patterns of development, "neural," "facial," and "skeletal." Girls were, in general, smaller than boys, but their development was more advanced when measured as a percentage of size at 16 years compared with boys.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 92%

Developmental changes in the facial soft tissues

Burke

Hughes-Lawson

1989

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sex differences in maxillary and mandibular growth favoring males have been previously established. 24,25 Sex differences are small during childhood and become pronounced during adolescence, as a result of the two extra years of childhood growth among males as well as the greater intensity of the male adolescent spurt.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Craniofacial growth of Class III subjects six to sixteen years of age

Wolfe¹,

Araújo²,

Behrents³

et al. 2011

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To characterize the mixed-longitudinal craniofacial growth of untreated, white, Class III subjects 6 to 16 years of age. Materials and Methods: Serial cephalograms of 19 females and 23 males with Class III malocclusion were evaluated at three time points (6-8, 10-12, and 14-16 years of age). A similar number of Class I controls were randomly selected and matched for age and sex. The cephalograms were traced and digitized, and 20 variables were evaluated. Growth patterns were quantified, and class and sex differences were evaluated using multi-level analyses. Results: In comparison with Class I subjects, Class III subjects had significantly (P # .05) larger mandibular plane angles, gonial angles, mandibular ramus heights, mandibular corpus lengths, and SNB angles, with differences that were maintained between 6 and 16 years of age. Maxillary lengths and ANB angles were significantly smaller and remained smaller in Class III subjects than in Class I subjects. Lower face height, maxillary-mandibular differential, and mandibular body length were also significantly larger and increased significantly more between 6 and 16 years of age in Class III subjects. The WITS appraisal was significantly smaller in Class III subjects and decreased significantly more over time. Most linear measures showed significant sex differences favoring males; the angular measures and anteroposterior (AP) maxillomandibular relationships showed no sex differences. Conclusions: The AP maxillomandibular relationship of Class III subjects worsens over time. AP discrepancies are primarily due to excessive mandibular growth, which produces a protrusive, hyperdivergent phenotype. The AP discrepancies of males are larger than those of females, with differences increasing over time. (Angle Orthod. 2011;81:211-216.)

show abstract

“…A study of the mandible in 6-10 year old French-Canadian children documented the presence of significant sexual dimorphism (a prepubertal phenomenon) in mandibular length but not in ramus height (Buschang et al, 1986). However, others have found a sex difference for ramus height, so this issue may not be fully resolved (Coben, 1955;Maj and Luzi, 1964).…”

Section: Sex Differences In Craniofacial Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

Sexual dimorphism using elliptical Fourier analysis: shape differences in the craniofacial complex

Lestrel

Kanazawa

Wolfe³

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assessment of sexual dimorphism plays an essential role in numerous disciplines such as: (1) forensics, with its concern with skeletal identification, including sexing; (2) archeology, where the sexing of skeletal materials is an essential aspect; (3) primatology, where sex differences are diverse; (4) paleoanthropology, where the identification of sex can influence taxonomic and phylogenetic decisions, and (5) growth and development, where one strives to identify differences before and after puberty. Other disciplines where sexual dimorphism plays an important function include orthodontics, gerontology, nutrition, and medicine. Quantitative studies of morphological forms in general, and sexual dimorphism in particular, is not a trivial endeavor in that at least two aspects are involved, namely size and shape. Focusing on the human skeletal system, sexual dimorphism affects all bones, including the cranium, pelvis, long bones, and vertebral column. However, the overwhelming numbers of studies of sexual dimorphism are based solely on size differences. These studies have repeatedly demonstrated that males are larger for most dimensions. The question of shape differences, if indeed present, cannot be readily inferred from these studies. Consequently, a number of studies were initiated, over some 20 years duration, that specifically focused on the presence of sexually dimorphic shape changes in the skeletal craniofacial complex. The following anatomical structures were examined: (1) the human nasal bones, (2) the primate cranial base, (3) the human cranial base, (4) the human dental arch, (5) the human mandibular arch, and (6) the human cranial vault. These six datasets involved 16 samples for a total of 1110 specimens. Every dataset generated statistically significant sexually dimorphic differences in shape. Thus, it is apparent that the craniofacial complex not only exhibits size differences but also specific shape differences.

show abstract

Sexual dimorphism in mandibular growth of French‐Canadian children 6 to 10 years of age

Cited by 22 publications

References 19 publications

Developmental changes in the facial soft tissues

Developmental changes in the facial soft tissues

Craniofacial growth of Class III subjects six to sixteen years of age

Sexual dimorphism using elliptical Fourier analysis: shape differences in the craniofacial complex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About