DMFR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stroud, J. L.
Right arrow Articles by Goaz, P. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Stroud, J. L.
Right arrow Articles by Goaz, P. W.

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Vol 23, Issue 3 169-171, Copyright © 1994 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

Sexual dimorphism in mesiodistal dentin and enamel thickness

J. L. Stroud, P. H. Buschang and P. W. Goaz
Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, Texas.

This study evaluates sexual dimorphism in mesiodistal diameter, enamel thickness and dentin thickness of the permanent posterior mandibular dentition in order to gain a better understanding of variation in mesiodistal tooth size. The results relate to a sample of 59 males and 39 females, 20-35 years of age. Bitewing radiographs of the right permanent mandibular premolars and molars were illuminated and transferred at a fixed magnification to a computer via a video camera. Enamel and dentin landmarks were identified and digitized on the plane representing the maximum mesiodistal diameter of each tooth. The results showed significant sex differences (p < 0.01) in mesiodistal diameter favouring males over females. Dimorphism was more pronounced for the molars than for the premolars. Enamel thickness, which is 0.4-0.7 mm greater for the molars than premolars, shows no significant sex differences. Dentin is significantly thicker in males than females, and is 3.5-4.0 mm thicker in molars than premolars. It is concluded that sexual dimorphism in mesiodistal tooth sizes is due to differences in dentin thickness and not enamel thickness.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of the American Dental AssociationHome page
N. E. Hall, S. J. Lindauer, E. Tufekci, and B. Shroff
Predictors of variation in mandibular incisor enamel thickness
J Am Dent Assoc, June 1, 2007; 138(6): 809 - 815.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING ALL BIR JOURNALS
Copyright © 1994 by the British Institute of Radiology.