ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Research Article
Revised

Association between digital dermatoglyphics and handedness among Sinhalese in Sri Lanka

[version 3; peer review: 2 approved]
PUBLISHED 04 Nov 2013
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Background The relationship between handedness and digital dermatoglyphic patterns has never been investigated in the Sinhalese population. The goal of this study is to establish the above mentioned relationship, which would positively aid personal identification. 
Findings One hundred forty Sinhalese students (70 right-handed and 70 left-handed) were studied for their digital dermatoglyphic pattern distribution. The results show that a statistically significant correlation exists for; digit 5 (Ulnar loop; P= 0.0449 and radial loop; P= 0.0248 by Fisher’s exact test) of the right hand in female, digit 1 (radial loop; P=0.0248 by Fisher’s exact test) and digit 2 (Ulnar loop; P=0.0306) of the left hand in females, digit 3 (Ulnar loop; P= 0.0486 and whorl; P= 0.0356 by Fisher’s exact test) and digit 4 (Ulnar loop; P= 0.0449 and whorl; P= 0.0301 by Fisher’s exact test) of the right hand in males, digit 4 (whorl; P=0.0160 by Fisher’s exact test) of the left hand in males.
Conclusions  Statistically significant differences in handedness and digital dermatoglyphic patterns were evident among Sinhalese people. Further study with a larger sample size is recommended.

Keywords

Forensic science, handedness, digital dermatoglyphics, fingerprints, personal identification, Sinhalese, Sri Lankans

Revised Amendments from Version 2

We would like to thank the reviewers for their valuable time and comments. We have corrected the typographical error in the method section; it is now clarified that 70 right- and 70 left-handed people were evaluated in the study rather than 50.

See the authors' detailed response to the review by Esperanza Gutierrez Redomero
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Matea Zajc Petranović

Introduction

Fingerprints (digital dermatoglyphics) are a unique form of evidence that greatly contribute towards personal identification in forensic science1. Because they are unique for each individual and are strongly influenced by genetics, they also perform a significant role in anthropology, human genetics, ethnology and medicine. They are characterized by alternating strips of raised friction ridges and grooves present in a variety of patterns2. These patterns start to develop between the 5th and 6th week of intrauterine life, and are fully formed by the 21st week3. These patterns do not change throughout postnatal life and their development is determined by several genes4.

Handedness (i.e. hand dominance) is defined as the uneven distribution of fine motor skills between the left and right hand5. Determination of the handedness of both the assailant and the victim are important in various aspects of forensic science, including personal identification6. Hence, establishing the relationship between handedness and digital dermatoglyphics will aid forensic identification.

To date, scarce amount of studies713 have investigated whether there is a correlation between handedness and digital dermatoglyphics. In 1940 Cummins discovered a slight association in the sex differences of asymmetrical occurrence of dermatoglyphic patterns8. Cromwell and Rife in 1942 found that left-handers are characterized by slightly less bimanual asymmetry than right-handers among on Caucasian school children in southwestern Ohio9. In 1943 Rife found associations characteristic of autosomal linkage between the whorl frequencies on the fingers and handedness among descended from northern European stock10. In 1994 Coren reported an increased number of arches, fewer whorls in left-handers as compared to the right-handers among Canadians11. Cho in 2010 found significant difference of dermatoglyphics patterns on digit 3, 4 and 5 among Koreans12. None have investigated this association in a Sinhalese population (an Indo-Aryan ethnic group who are native to the island of Sri Lanka14). The main goal of the current study is to determine the relationship between handedness and digital dermatoglyphics in a sample of Sinhalese population.

Methods

The study was conducted at the Department of Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka. Ethical clearance for this study was obtained from the Ethical Clearance Committee of the institute. Total of hundred forty Sinhalese students (70 females, 70 males) who gave informed written consent were included in the study. Ages of females ranged between 21 and 28 years (mean ± s.d. = 24.40 ± 1.82 years) and males ranged from 22 and 28 years (mean ± s.d. = 24.67 ± 1.92 years). Firstly, handedness was assessed using the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory15. This required participants to demonstrate 10 unimanual tasks (preferred hand for writing, drawing, throwing, striking a match, opening a box, holding scissors, holding a toothbrush, holding a spoon, holding a broom and holding a knife). These tasks are common to Sri Lankans and they were advised to state the degree of preference for the hand used in each case as either strong (two points) or weak (one point). The handedness measure was calculated by subtracting the score for the left hand from the score for the right hand, dividing by the sum of both, and multiplying it by 100, providing an absolute range from -100 (completely left-handed) to +100 (completely right-handed). We recruited 70 predominant right-handers and 70 predominant left-handers after evaluating handedness.

All eligible students were asked to wash their hands thoroughly to remove dirt and dry them before obtaining fingerprints. Rolled prints were obtained by the ink and paper method as described by Cummins and Midlo2. The subject was asked to roll their finger from the radial side to the ulnar side on an ink pad and then transfer their fingerprints in the same manner onto the allocated area of a double sheet of plain A4 paper (Figure 1). In this way, fingerprints for all the ten fingers were obtained for each individual. Digits are numbered as follows; digit 1 (thumb), digit 2 (index finger), digit 3 (middle finger), digit 4 (ring finger) and digit 5 (little finger).

e201d09e-b674-4bc7-91d0-da8a7afc2cc3_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Method for obtaining fingerprints.

A and B show the rolling of the finger from the radial side to ulnar side on an ink pad. C and D show the transference of fingerprints onto the allocated area of the paper.

Digital dermatoglyphic patterns (Figure 2) were classified as follows; ulnar loop, radial loop, whorl (double loop whorl, plain whorl, central pocket loop and accidental whorl were counted as whorl) and arch (plain arch and tented arch were counted as arch ). In this way, fingerprints of all the ten fingers were obtained for each individual.

e201d09e-b674-4bc7-91d0-da8a7afc2cc3_figure2.gif

Figure 2. Different types of fingerprints.

A: Ulnar loop, B: Radial loop, C: Plain Whorl, D: Double loop whorl, E: Plain arch, F: Tented arch, G: Accidental whorl, H: Central pocket loop.

Analysis was carried out using GraphPad Prism 5 software (version 5.03 for Windows; GraphPad Software, San Diego California USA). Descriptive statistics were used to express the data. Correlations between handedness and digital dermatoglyphics were evaluated by a two-sided Fisher’s exact test. P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

In this study we observed the handedness-wise digital dermatoglyphics pattern distribution of 140 individuals (70 left-handed [35 females, 35 males] and 70 right-handed [35 males, 35 females]).

Handedness wise differences of digital prints in females

Right hand. Table 1 shows the digital dermatoglyphic pattern distribution of the right hand in females. On the digit 3 of right hand of right-handed students found to have more ulnar loop (74%) compared to left handers (57%) and on the digit 5 of right hand of right-handed students found to have more ulnar loop (77%) compared to left handers (51%). On the digit 5 of right hand of left-handed students found to have more radial loop (17%) compared to right handers (0%). Whorl and arch patterns have not shown significant difference. A statistically significant correlation was observed in digital dermatoglyphic patterns between right and left-handed people for digit 5 (Ulnar loop; P = 0.0449 and radial loop; P = 0.0248 by Fisher’s exact test).

Table 1. Digital dermatoglyphic pattern distribution of right hand in females.

DigitHandednessUlnar LoopRadial LoopWhorlArch
(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡
n%n%n%n%n%n%n%n%
Digit 1Right236612340.623800351000.239112342366100351001
Left2057154339329111312469133497
Digit 2Right21601440100351000.49281131246913932910.6139
Left2263133726339410292571133497
Digit 3Right26749260.20762633940.428372029830.579800351001
Left2057154351430869262674133497
Digit 4Right1954164611334971154320570.623800351000.4928
Left1954164626339412342366263394
Digit 5Right27778230.0449*00351000.0248*82327770.785100351001
Left18511749617298310292571133497

‡ = Two sided fishers exact test, * P=<0.05

Left hand. Table 2 shows the digital dermatoglyphic pattern distribution of the left hand in females. On the digit 3 of left hand of right-handed students found to have more ulnar loop (71%) compared to left handers (54%) and on the digit 5 of left hand of right-handed students found to have more ulnar loop (69%) compared to left handers (49%). On the digit 2 of left hand of left-handed students found to have more ulnar loop (63%) compared to left handers (34%), followed by 40% whorl on right handed compared to 23% whorl in left handed. On the digit 1 of left hand of right-handed individuals found to have more whorl (46%) compared to left handers (29%), followed by 17% radial loop on left handed compared to 0 % radial loop in right handed. A statistically significant correlation was observed in digital dermatoglyphic patterns between right and left-handed people for digit 1 (Radial loop; P = 0.0248 by Fisher’s exact test) and digit 2 (Ulnar loop; P = 0.0306 by Fisher’s exact test).

Table 2. Digital dermatoglyphic pattern distribution of left hand in females.

DigitHandednessUlnar LoopRadial LoopWhorlArch
(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡
n%n%n%n%n%n%n%n%
Digit 1Right174918510.811200351000.0248*164619540.21592633940.4928
Left195416466172983102925710035100
Digit 2Right123423660.0306*51430860.7096144021600.197541131890.6733
Left226313373932918232777263394
Digit 3Right257110290.21591334970.356572028800.57812633941
Left19541646411318910292571263394
Digit 4Right1851174911334970.3565164619540.326100351001
Left19541646411318911312469133497
Digit 5Right246911310.14491334970.356592626740.44031334971
Left17491851411318913372263133497

‡ = Two sided fishers exact test, * P = <0.05

Handedness wise differences of digital prints in males

Right hand. Table 3 shows the digital dermatoglyphic pattern distribution of the right hand in males. On the digit 3 of right hand of right-handed students found to have more ulnar loop (74%) compared to left handers (49%) and on the digit 4 of right hand of right-handed students found to have more ulnar loop (49%) compared to left handers (23%). On the digit 3 of right hand of left-handed students found to have more whorl (43%) compared to right-handers (17%) and on the digit 4 of right hand of left-handed students found to have more whorl (69%) compared to right handers (40%). Radial loop and arch pattern have not shown significant difference. A statistically significant correlation was observed in digital dermatoglyphic patterns between right and left-handed people for digit 3 (Ulnar loop; P = 0.0486 and whorl; P = 0.0356 by Fisher’s exact test) and digit 4 (Ulnar loop; P = 0.0449 and whorl; 0.0301 by Fisher’s exact test).

Table 3. Digital dermatoglyphic pattern distribution in right hand of males.

DigitHandednessUlnar LoopRadial LoopWhorlArch
(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡
n%n%n%n%n%n%n%n%
Digit 1Right2057154312633940.492813372263100351000.4928
Left19541646003510014402160263394
Digit 2Right19541646139329119262674141131891
Left18511749411318992626744113189
Digit 3Right26749260.0486*133497161729830.0356*2633941
Left1749185126339415432057133497
Digit 4Right174918510.0449*41131890.673314402160 0.0301*00351001
Left823277726339424691131133497
Digit 5Right2674926141131890.11425143086 0.370700351001
Left2674926003510092626740035100

‡ = Two sided fishers exact test, * P = <0.05

Left hand. Table 4 shows the digital dermatoglyphic pattern distribution of the right hand in males. On the digit 2 of left hand of left-handed students found to have more ulnar loop (63%) compared to right handers (43%) and on the digit 4 of left hand of right-handed students found to have more ulnar loop (60%) compared to left handers (37%). Radial loop, whorl and arch pattern have not shown significant difference. A statistically significant correlation was observed in digital dermatoglyphic patterns between right and left-handed people for digit 4 (0.016 by Fisher’s exact test).

Table 4. Digital dermatoglyphic pattern distribution of left hand in males.

DigitHandednessUlnar LoopRadial LoopWhorlArch
(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡(+)(-)P value‡
n%n%n%n%n%n%n%n%
Digit 1Right205715430.31852633941133722630.296800351001
Left257110291334978232777133497
Digit 2Right154320570.150341131890.6733113124690.153551430861
Left2263133726339451430866172983
Digit 3Right216014400.6307393291182327770.42793932911
Left1851174926339412342366393291
Digit 4Right216014400.09353932910.2391113124690.016*00351001
Left133722630035100226313370035100
Digit 5Right257110290.57813932910.23917202880100351001
Left2880720003510072028800035100

‡ = Two sided fishers exact test, * P = <0.05

The percentage of digital dermatoglyphics pattern distributions for both hands in male and female Sinhalese are shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4.

e201d09e-b674-4bc7-91d0-da8a7afc2cc3_figure3.gif

Figure 3. Digital dermatoglyphics pattern distributions in both hands of males.

e201d09e-b674-4bc7-91d0-da8a7afc2cc3_figure4.gif

Figure 4. Digital dermatoglyphics pattern distributions in both hands of females.

Discussion

It has been affirmed that the digital dermatoglyphic pattern of the skin is unique and unchallengeable for an individual1. This is valuable as a means of identification. In this study, effort has been made to study the relationship between dermatoglyphic and handedness in 140 Sinhalese students.

The results showed that a statistically significant correlation exists in digit 5 of the right hand while digit 1 and digit 2 of left hand in female. In males digit 3 and digit 4 of right hand and digit 4 of left hand showed a statistically significant correlation.

In the past, few studies have been conducted on different ethnic groups with the idea of establishing a relationship between handedness and dermatoglyphic pattern. Results of some studies are in line with the present study.

In their study on Caucasian school children in southwestern Ohio, Cromwell and Rife (1942)9 observed a slightly higher frequency of whorls (1.3%) on left ring fingers (digit 4) of left-handers than of right-handers. Whorls were absent on the right ring finger of both right- and left-handers. They further observed that the incidence of arches only on digit 3 of right hands shows highly significant differences between left-handers and right-handers (P<0.001).

Coren (1994)11 in his study on Canadians found that left-handers were more likely to have arches and radial loops, while fewer whorls than right-handers. The correlation of handedness and digital dermatoglyphics was most marked on the left hand, which showed significant differences on four digits except digit 1. On the right hand, handedness was associated with a digital dermatoglyphics patterns only on digit 4.

Cho (2010)12, in their study on Koreans, found that both hands of left handers exhibited more arch and ulnar loop types than the right-handers and less whorl and radial loop types than the right-handers. The digital dermatoglyphic pattern of digit 3, digit 4 and digit 5 of the left hand showed a statistically significant relationship between left- and right-handed people.

In Karev's study on Bulgarian individuals13, he found that whorls were significantly less frequent, and ulnar loops significantly more frequent in all digits for right-handed people when compared to left-handed people. The ulnar fluctuating asymmetries of digits 1 and 4 showed a highly significant relationship with handedness.

Rife (1955)16, in his study on students at Ohio State University, USA, observed that arches were more common on the left middle finger of right-handed students than left-handed students. Left-handedness has a frequency of about 10% in the general population with a slightly higher frequency in the male population compared to the female population17,18. In our study we analyzed dermatoglyphics pattern of 70 left hander’s (35 males, 35 females) and compared it with right hander’s (35 males, 35 females). Gender wise differences in digital dermatoglyphics patterns have been established for now and then19. We compared handedness wise difference of dermatoglyphics pattern in right and left hand of both male and female Sinhalese separately.

The major limitation of our study is the small sample size. Despite the small sample size, it exhibited a significant handedness wise difference of dermatoglyphics among Sinhalese. Additional research involve large sample are needed to further confirm current findings.

Conclusion

The present study supports the hypothesis that handedness and digital dermatoglyphics are correlated in members of the Sinhalese population. Our results show that there is a statistically significant difference in fingerprint patterns between right- and left-handed people for digit 5 of the right hand and for digits 1 and 2 of the left hand in females, and digit 3 and digit 4 of the right hand and digit 4 of the left hand in males. The results of this study support the relationship between handedness and digital dermatoglyphics in the Sinhalese population. The results can be used as supporting evidence for personal identification.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 3
VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 18 Apr 2013
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Wijerathne BT and Rathnayake GK. Association between digital dermatoglyphics and handedness among Sinhalese in Sri Lanka [version 3; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 2:111 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-111.v3)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 3
VERSION 3
PUBLISHED 04 Nov 2013
Revised
Views
16
Cite
Reviewer Report 05 Mar 2014
Esperanza Gutierrez Redomero, Department of Zoology and Physical Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, University of Alcalá, Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain 
Approved
VIEWS 16
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Gutierrez Redomero E. Reviewer Report For: Association between digital dermatoglyphics and handedness among Sinhalese in Sri Lanka [version 3; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 2:111 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.2852.r3981)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Version 2
VERSION 2
PUBLISHED 08 Jul 2013
Views
14
Cite
Reviewer Report 09 Oct 2013
Esperanza Gutierrez Redomero, Department of Zoology and Physical Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, University of Alcalá, Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain 
Approved
VIEWS 14
In the Methods section, the authors say: “We recruited 50 predominant right-handers and 50 predominant left-handers after evaluating handedness” but in the Results section they say “In this study we observed the handedness-wise digital dermatoglyphics pattern distribution of 140 individuals ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Gutierrez Redomero E. Reviewer Report For: Association between digital dermatoglyphics and handedness among Sinhalese in Sri Lanka [version 3; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 2:111 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1865.r2054)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
12
Cite
Reviewer Report 08 Jul 2013
Matea Zajc Petranović, Institute of Anthropology, Zagreb, Croatia 
Approved
VIEWS 12
The article is clearly laid out and all the key elements ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Petranović MZ. Reviewer Report For: Association between digital dermatoglyphics and handedness among Sinhalese in Sri Lanka [version 3; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 2:111 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1865.r1044)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 01 Aug 2013
    Buddhika Wijerathne, Department of Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Saliyapura, Sri Lanka
    01 Aug 2013
    Author Response
    We would like to thank Matea Zajc Petranović for spending her valuable time to review the manuscript.
    Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 01 Aug 2013
    Buddhika Wijerathne, Department of Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Saliyapura, Sri Lanka
    01 Aug 2013
    Author Response
    We would like to thank Matea Zajc Petranović for spending her valuable time to review the manuscript.
    Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 18 Apr 2013
Views
24
Cite
Reviewer Report 07 May 2013
Esperanza Gutierrez Redomero, Department of Zoology and Physical Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, University of Alcalá, Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 24
The study was based on data from 100 individuals (50 left-handed [31 females, 19 males] and 50 right-handed [27 males, 23 females]). The greatest limitation of this study is the small sample size, as authors indicate; this size would be ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Gutierrez Redomero E. Reviewer Report For: Association between digital dermatoglyphics and handedness among Sinhalese in Sri Lanka [version 3; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 2:111 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1272.r931)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 08 Jul 2013
    Buddhika Wijerathne, Department of Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Saliyapura, Sri Lanka
    08 Jul 2013
    Author Response
    We would like to thank Professor Esperanza Gutierrez Redomero for the valuable time spent reviewing our manuscript and the important comments she has made. We have attempted to address and ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 08 Jul 2013
    Buddhika Wijerathne, Department of Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Saliyapura, Sri Lanka
    08 Jul 2013
    Author Response
    We would like to thank Professor Esperanza Gutierrez Redomero for the valuable time spent reviewing our manuscript and the important comments she has made. We have attempted to address and ... Continue reading

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 3
VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 18 Apr 2013
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.