[Downloaded free from http://www.jfds.org on Sunday, September 6, 2020, IP: 139.194.72.

154]

Original Article

Correlative study on lip prints, fingerprints,

and mandibular intercanine distance for
gender determination
J. K. Sonia Bai,
A. Ravi Prakash,
A. Vikram Simha Reddy,
M. Rajinikanth, Abstract
S. Sreenath, Context: “Identity” is a set of physical characteristics, functional or psychic, normal or
K. Veera Kishore Kumar pathological, that defines an individual. Identification of an individual is a crucial and an
Reddy1 exigent task in forensic investigation. Aims: The aim of the present pilot study was to
Department of Oral Pathology,
G Pulla Reddy Dental College and investigate the accuracy of various methods employed in gender determination such as
Hospital, Kurnool, 1Department lip prints, mandibular canine index (MCI), fingerprints, and correlation between them.
of Pedodontics and Preventive Subjects and Methods: The pilot study group consisted of 300 samples aged between
Dentistry, C.K.S Theja Institute of 18 and 25 years. Lip prints, fingerprints, and impressions of lower mandibular arches were
Dental Sciences, Tirupathi,
Andhra Pradesh, India collected. Statistical Analysis Used: The results were analyzed using Chi‑square test
for lip prints and fingerprints with an independent sample t‑test for the MCI. Intergroup
comparison between the parameters was analyzed by ANNOVA test. Results: Type II
lip print pattern and loop pattern of fingerprints were the predominant patterns in both
Address for correspondence: males and females, and mesiodistal width of right MCI has greater sexual dimorphism
Dr. J. K. Sonia Bai,
than left MCI. Conclusions: Although lip prints, fingerprints, and MCI had their own
CKS Theja Dental College and
Hospital, Renigunta Road, specifications, correlation of the three parameters did not show any significance.
Tirupathi, Andhra Pradesh, India.
E‑mail: drsoniasinghrajput@ Key words: Cheiloscopy, finger prints, mandibular canines, gender, patterns
gmail.com

Introduction analysis are the most common techniques employed to

ensure fast and secure identification, there are certain

I dentification of an individual is an important and circumstances related to the scene of the crime, where other
challenging task in the forensic investigation. [1] It is supplemental aids such as lip prints, bite marks, dental
important for legal as well as for humanitarian purposes. identification, and palatal rugae patterns become essential.
Gender determination is an essential step in the identification Human identification involves the combination of different
of an individual.[2] Positive identification of living or procedures for individualizing a person.[4]
deceased humans using distinctive traits is a cornerstone in
the field of forensics. The uniqueness of patterns and subtle The dentition is considered as a useful adjunct in gender
distinction between the traits help in establishing the true determination as teeth are resistant to postmortem
nature of facts.[3] Although DNA comparison and fingerprint
This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of
the Creative Commons Attribution‑NonCommercial‑ShareAlike 4.0 License,
Access this article online which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non‑commercially,
Quick Response Code as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under
Website: the identical terms.

www.jfds.org
For reprints contact: reprints@medknow.com

How to cite this article: Bai JK, Prakash AR, Reddy AV,
DOI: Rajinikanth  M, Sreenath S, Kumar Reddy KV. Correlative study
10.4103/jfo.jfds_22_16 on lip prints, fingerprints, and mandibular intercanine distance for
gender determination. J Forensic Dent Sci 2018;10:143-50.

© 2019 Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences | Published by Wolters Kluwer ‑ Medknow 143

[Downloaded free from http://www.jfds.org on Sunday, September 6, 2020, IP: 139.194.72.154]

Bai, et al.: Correlative study on lip prints, fingerprints, and mandibular intercanine distance

destruction and fragmentation.[5] Their ability to survive prints are considered unique to an individual and analogous
fire and bacterial decomposition makes them a valuable to fingerprints.[11]
aid in the forensic identification. “Sexual dimorphism”
refers to those differences in size, shape, and appearance The study was designed with the prime objective
between males and females that can be applied to dental of determining the most common lip print and
identification as no two mouths are alike. Of all the teeth fingerprint patterns among males and females, sexual
in the human dentition, mandibular canines exhibit greater dimorphism of mandibular canines, and if there is any
sexual dimorphism and considered as “key teeth” for correlation existing between these parameters for gender
personal identification.[6] determination.

The theory of uniqueness is a strong point used in the Subjects and Methods
analysis of fingerprints. Fingerprint evidence is the most
reliable and acceptable evidence for the identification of an Study sample
individual in the court of law.[7] “Dermatoglyphics” refers A study sample comprised of 300 students (150 males and
to epidermal ridges present on the palm, sole, fingers, and 150 females) aged between 18 and 25 years were selected,
toes.”[8] Every individual has an unique fingerprint pattern, following inclusion and exclusion criteria. Informed
and based on genetic characters of each individual, it consent was taken from all the study subjects, along with
remains unchanged throughout life.[9] the institutional ethical committee approval. Cheiloscopy,
fingerprint analysis, and mandibular canine index (MCI)
One of the most emerging methods of human identification, were performed in each student to investigate the accuracy
which originates from criminal and forensic practice, is in gender determination.
recognition of lip prints.[10] The wrinkles and grooves on the
labial mucosa form a characteristic pattern known as “lip For cheiloscopy
prints,” the study of which is referred to as cheiloscopy. Lip The materials used were a red or brown‑colored lipstick,

Figure 1: Method of applying lip prints with ear bud

Figure 2: Recording lip prints with cellophane tape

Figure 3: Type I lip pattern Figure 4: Type-I' lip print

144 Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences / Volume 10 / Issue 3 / September-December 2018

[Downloaded free from http://www.jfds.org on Sunday, September 6, 2020, IP: 139.194.72.154]

Bai, et al.: Correlative study on lip prints, fingerprints, and mandibular intercanine distance

ear bud, cellophane tape, thin bond paper, magnifying lens, • Type I: Clear‑cut vertical grooves that run across the
and pen/pencil for labeling the individual details. entire lip [Figure 3]
• Type I’: Similar to Type I but does not cover the entire
The lips of each subject were thoroughly examined clinically lip [Figure 4]
for any deformity, scars, or abnormality, and the findings • Type II: Branched grooves (Y‑shaped pattern) [Figure 5]
were noted. If any abnormality was noticed, then such cases • Type III: Intersecting [Figure 6]
were excluded from the study. Lips of the subjects were • Type IV: Crisscross patterns, reticular grooves [Figure 7]
cleaned, and they were asked to open the mouth where • Type V: Undetermined [Figure 8].
lipstick was applied in a single motion [Figure 1]. Subjects
were asked to gently rub the lips together to spread the For finger prints
lipstick evenly, and then, they made a lip impression in the The record of fingerprint impressions was obtained using
normal rest position of the lips, by dabbing it in the center first blue ink stamp pad, white bond paper, and a magnifying
and then pressing it uniformly toward the corners of the lips glass. The subjects included were all healthy, and individuals
[Figure 2]. Care was taken to avoid sliding of the lips so as to with physical disability, systemic illness, or syndromes were
prevent smudging of the print over the entire area of the red excluded. Subjects were asked to wash and dry their hands
part of the lips. After 2 min, a lip impression was made on a to remove dirt and grease. The imprint obtained from the left
strip of cellophane tape. The cellophane strip was then stuck thumb was transferred on to white bond paper. These prints
to the white paper for permanent record purpose, and then, were examined, classified, and analyzed using the magnifying
the recorded lip prints were visualized utilizing magnifying glass. Analysis of fingerprint patterns was carried out using the
lens. Because of numerically superiority of properties of the most widely accepted Michael Kucken’s classification. (1) Loop
lines in the middle part of the lower lip (10 mm wide)[12] and pattern, (2) arch pattern, (3) whorl pattern [Figures 9-11].[14]
almost visible in any trace, this fragment was selected for
the study area. In this study, we followed the classification All the above values of lip print and fingerprints were
of patterns of lines on the lips given by Tsuchihashi.[13] subjected to Chi‑square test.

Figure 5: Type-II lip print Figure 6: Type-III lip print

Figure 7: Type-IV lip print Figure 8: Type-V lip print

Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences / Volume 10 / Issue 3 / September-December 2018 145

[Downloaded free from http://www.jfds.org on Sunday, September 6, 2020, IP: 139.194.72.154]

Bai, et al.: Correlative study on lip prints, fingerprints, and mandibular intercanine distance

Figure 9: Fingerprint pattern-loop Figure 10: Fingerprint pattern-whorl type

30 27.01
25.58
25
Males
20
Females
15
10 7.01 6.4 6.94 6.38
5
0.26 0.25 0.26 0.25
0
MICD MWRMC MWLMC RMCI LMCI

Graph 1: Comparison between males and females for mandibular

intercanine distance, mesiodistal width of right mandibular canine,
mesiodistal width of left mandibular canine, right mandibular canine
index and left mandibular canine index (independent sample t‑test)

Figure 11: Fingerprint pattern-arch type

Males
56.00% Females
90.00% Males 53.80% 53.20% 53.20%
83.30% 54.00%
80.00% Females 76.70%
71.40% 52.00%
70.00% 63.90%
58.80% 50.00%
60.00% 54.60%
50.00% 45.40% 48.00%
41.20%
46.20% 46.80% 46.80%
40.00% 36.10%
28.60% 46.00%
30.00% 23.30%
16.70% 44.00%
20.00%
10.00% 42.00%
ARCHES LOOP WHORLS
0.00%
TYPE I TYPE I' TYPE II TYPE III TYPE IV TYPE V
Graph 3: Comparison between males and females for fingerprints
Graph 2: Comparison between males and females for lip prints (Chi‑square test)
(Chi‑square test)
120.00%

ARCHES LOOP WHORLS 100.00%

120.00% ARCHES LOOP WHORLS 100.00%
100.00%
100.00% 80.00%
62.00% 65.20%
80.00% 60.00% 56.50%
49.00% 50.00%
60.00% 57.10% 56.50% 38.80% 40.00%
60.00% 54.20% 40.00% 30.40%
48.00% 26.00%
42.90%
40.00% 33.90% 32.00% 30.40% 20.00% 12.00% 17.40% 17.40% 12.20% 10.00% 13.00%
22.90% 20.00%
20.00% 17.10%
0.00% 0.00%
11.90% 13.00% 0.00%
0.00%0.00% TYPE I TYPE I' TYPE II TYPE III TYPE IV TYPE V
0.00%
0.00%
TYPE I TYPE I' TYPE II TYPE III TYPE IV TYPE V
Graph 5: Comparison between lip prints and fingerprints for females
Graph 4: Comparison between lip prints and fingerprints for males
abnormalities such as severe malocclusion, increased overjet
For mandibular canine index and overbite, supernumerary teeth, and transposed canine
The materials used were the lower impression trays, alginate were excluded.
impression material (Tropicalgin), dental stone (Denstone),
graphite lead black pencil, and magnifying glass. Besides Mandibular impressions of all the samples were made with
fulfilling the criteria of having the full complement of teeth, alginate and study models were prepared in dental stone.
146 Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences / Volume 10 / Issue 3 / September-December 2018
[Downloaded free from http://www.jfds.org on Sunday, September 6, 2020, IP: 139.194.72.154]

Bai, et al.: Correlative study on lip prints, fingerprints, and mandibular intercanine distance

Grah 6: Comparison between lip prints and mandibular intercanine Graph 7: Comparison between lip prints and mandibular intercanine
distance for males distance for females

Graph 8: Comparison between fingerprints and mandibular intercanine Graph 9: Comparison between fingerprints and mandibular inter‑canine
distance for males distance for females

35
29.00

26.47

26.43
25.185

26.21
26.16
26.14
26.10
28.33
27.92

25.67
25.65

30
27.75

25.43
25.36
27.48

25.24
25.19

25.04
27.01

24.90
26.98

26.82
26.82

26.76
26.62

26.52

24.48
24.38
26.32
25.73
25.72

30
25
25
20
20
ARCHES ARCHES
15 15 LOOP
LOOP
WHORLS WHORLS
10 10
5
0.00

0.00

0.00

5
0
0

TYPE I TYPE I ' TYPE II TYPE III TYPE IV TYPE V 0

TYPE I TYPE I ' TYPE II TYPE III TYPE IV TYPE V

Graph 10: Correlation between lip prints, fingerprints, and mandibular Graph 11: Correlation between lip prints, fingerprints, and mandibular
intercanine distance for males intercanine distance for females

Mandibular study models were used for the analysis. On

the study model, the following measurements were taken the linear distance between the cusp tips of right and left
mandibular canine. The observed mandibular canine width
for all the subjects using a digital vernier caliper.
and intercanine width were subjected to statistical analysis
to assess gender difference using independent t‑test.[15,16]
Mandibular canine width was measured as the greatest
mesiodistal dimension of mandibular canine on either Mandibular Canine Index =
side of the jaw using a vernier caliper, and the average of Mesiodistal crown width of mandibular canine
this was taken. The intercanine distance was measured as Mandibular canine arch width
Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences / Volume 10 / Issue 3 / September-December 2018 147
[Downloaded free from http://www.jfds.org on Sunday, September 6, 2020, IP: 139.194.72.154]

Bai, et al.: Correlative study on lip prints, fingerprints, and mandibular intercanine distance

Table 1: Comparison between males & females for MICD, MWRMC, MWLMC, RMCI and LMCI (Independent sample t‑test)
Variables Males Females Total t p
N Mean Std. Dev. N Mean Std. Dev. N Mean Std. Dev.
MICD 150 27.01 1.86 150 25.58 1.69 300 26.30 1.89 7.095 <0.0001
(very High Sig)
MWRMC 150 7.01 0.49 150 6.40 0.41 300 6.70 0.54 11.466 <0.0001
(very High Sig)
MWLMC 150 6.94 0.47 150 6.38 0.40 300 6.66 0.52 10.89 <0.0001
(very High Sig)
RMCI 150 0.26 0.02 150 0.25 0.02 300 0.26 0.02 4.38 <0.0001
(very High Sig)
LMCI 150 0.26 0.02 150 0.25 0.02 300 0.25 0.02 3.95 <0.0001
(very High Sig)

Table 2: Comparison between males & females for lip prints: males and females, 28.3% had Type I, 10% with Type I’, 35%
(Chi‑Square test) with Type II, 11.7% with Type III, 10% with Type IV, and
Lip Males Females Total N (%) Chi‑Square P 5% with Type V lip prints. In males, Type II lip prints were
prints N (%) N (%) predominant followed by Type I, Type III, Type IV, Type I’,
TYPE I 35 (41.2) 50 (58.8) 85 (28.3) 23.98 <0.0001 and Type V. In females, Type I lip prints were predominant
TYPE I’ 7 (23.3) 23 (76.7) 30 (10.0) Very High
followed by Type II, Type I’, Type III, Type IV, and Type V.
TYPE II 59 (54.6) 49 (45.4) 108 (36.0) Sig
Results were analyzed by Chi‑square test and showed very
TYPE III 25 (71.4) 10 (28.6) 35 (11.7) high statistical significance  (P  <  0.0001) for different lip
TYPE IV 23 (63.9) 13 (36.1) 36 (12.0) patterns in between males and females.
TYPE V 1 (16.7) 5 (83.3) 6 (2.0)
TOTAL 150 (50.0) 150 (50.0) 300 (100.00) Mandibular intercanine distance (MICD), mesiodistal width of
right mandibular canine, mesiodistal width of left mandibular
Table 3: Comparison between males & females for finger prints: canine, right MCI, and left MCI gave statistical significance
(Chi‑Square test) results, and sexual dimorphism of right mandibular canine
Finger Males Females Total N (%) Chi‑Square P is proved to be higher than that of left mandibular canine.
Prints N (%) N (%) All measurements indicate that in the sample investigated,
ARCHES 21 (53.8) 18 (46.2) 39 (13.0) 2.481 0.289 males have larger tooth and arch dimensions and found to be
LOOP 83 (53.2) 73 (46.8) 156 (52.0) (NOT SIG)
statistically significant and with 89% accuracy. Results were
WHORLS 46 (43.8) 59 (56.2) 105 (35.0) analyzed by independent sample t‑test. Statistical analysis
TOTAL 150 (50.0) 150 (50.0) 300 (100.00) showed very high significant difference.

The results of all the three parameters were verified from Intergroup comparison and correlation
the coded data collected at the beginning of the study, and If we consider single parameters in our study, we got statistical
a correlation between each pair of the parameters was significance for MICD with 89% accuracy and lip prints
statistically done using univariate ANOVA test. with 80% accuracy. Fingerprints did not give any statistical
significance results in gender determination [Tables 1‑3].
Results
On correlating all the three parameters, the observations
Within individual groups were subjected to statistical analysis by univariate ANNOVA
The examination of lip print and fingerprint patterns test within the genders [Graphs 4-11] and in between the
revealed the following observations: genders and the results were not of statistical significant in
gender determination [Table 4].
No two lip prints and fingerprints matched with each
other. Our observation revealed that in fingerprint pattern, On comparison, Type II lip print is associated with loop
the loop pattern (52%) is predominant in both males and pattern predominantly in both males and females followed
females followed by whorls (35%) and arches (13%). All the by whorl pattern and MICD >26.5 mm considered to be as
results were subjected to statistical analysis by Chi‑square males.
test and the results obtained were not of significance within
the gender (P = 0.289) [Graphs 1-3]. Discussion

With regard to lip print pattern, Type II lip print was found Human identification is one of the most challenging subjects
to be predominant in males, females and in both. In both that human has been confronted with.[11] Usually, personal

148 Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences / Volume 10 / Issue 3 / September-December 2018

[Downloaded free from http://www.jfds.org on Sunday, September 6, 2020, IP: 139.194.72.154]

Bai, et al.: Correlative study on lip prints, fingerprints, and mandibular intercanine distance

Table 4: Comparison between lip prints, finger prints & micd for the past, few researchers have worked on lip prints
both male & females (Univariate ANOVA test ‑ GLM) with the idea of proving that lip prints aid in gender
Descriptive Statistics identification.
Dependent Variable: Mandibular inter canine distance
Finger type Lip_print Mean Std. Deviation N The analysis of fingerprints as a form of identification has
ARCHES TYPE I 26.0800 1.54626 12 been used since 1891. No two fingerprints even in a given
TYPE I ‘ 26.1400 2.16927 4 individual have the same ridge pattern and this remains
TYPE II 25.9015 1.88860 13 unchanged throughout life from birth till death. This
TYPE III 25.7983 2.17540 6 uniqueness in its presentation of the fingerprint analysis
TYPE IV 28.9967 0.27209 3 offers an excellent means of forensic investigations. [3]
TYPE V 26.4300 1 Gender classification from fingerprints is an important
Total 26.2167 1.86976 39 step in forensic anthropology to identify the gender of a
LOOP TYPE I 26.3077 1.50843 52 criminal and minimize the list of suspects search. Most of
TYPE I ‘ 26.1200 1.36475 8 the studies on dermatoglyphics were carried to study the
TYPE II 26.2275 1.89044 56 fingerprint pattern in relation to different blood groups and
TYPE III 26.6241 1.53301 17 the number of ridges, ridge density.
TYPE IV 27.3045 1.71918 20
TYPE V 25.1600 2.25247 3 Studies on fingerprint patterns for gender determination
Total 26.4095 1.71162 156 are scarce in the literature.[18,19] Studies done by Wijerathne
WHORLS TYPE I 26.3329 2.48685 21 et  al.[20] and Mutalik et  al.[3] showed loop pattern to be
TYPE I ‘ 26.0967 1.86311 18 predominant in both males and females followed by whorls
TYPE II 26.5992 2.08762 39 and arches, which were similar with the results obtained
TYPE III 25.5650 1.47789 12 in our study.
TYPE IV 25.4262 2.53765 13
TYPE V 25.0350 0.45962 2 Studies on tooth morphology have been conducted in the
Total 26.1666 2.12996 105 past using either intraoral measurements or measurements
Total TYPE I 26.2818 1.78156 85 on casts. [21] Among all teeth, the mandibular canines
TYPE I ‘ 26.1087 1.72379 30 are found to exhibit greatest sexual dimorphism.[5] The
TYPE II 26.3225 1.95932 108 present study endeavors to establish the effectiveness of
TYPE III 26.1194 1.66209 35 MCI in predicting sex by taking correct dental alignment
TYPE IV 26.7672 2.25290 36 into consideration. This is of definite significance as
TYPE V 25.3300 1.53813 6 tooth morphology is known to be influenced by cultural,
Total 26.2994 1.88532 300 environmental, and racial factors.

The present study establishes the existence of a definite

identification is made by comparing antemortem data with
statistically significant sexual dimorphism in mandibular
that of postmortem records.[8] Cheiloscopy is an upcoming tool
canines. It is consistent with the findings of Hashim and
in the forensic dentistry which helps in forensic investigation.
Murshid,[22] who conducted a study on Saudi males and
They are most important forms of transfer evidence analogous
females and found that only the canines in both jaws
to finger prints. Lip prints might be left at crime scenes and
exhibited a significant sexual difference. Studies performed
can provide a direct link to the suspect. The edges of the lips
on the lower canines using the ratio between the maximum
have sebaceous glands and sweat glands in between. The crown width and canine arc width, resulting in an MCI.
secretions of oil and continuous moisturizing by the tongue The study has shown an ability to determine gender when
leads to latent lip prints similar to fingerprints.[17] performed on 384 females and 382 males of the South Indian
population with an accuracy of 84.3% in males and 87.5%
The current study was conducted using the Tsuchihashi in females by comparing the observed MCI with a standard
classification, which is considered as a standard MCI value.[2,6] In the present study, both these parameters
classification. Even though lines and furrows are present were measured in males and females and compared. The
in both upper and lower lip from one corner to the other, difference was found to be statistically significant. Sexual
the middle portion of lower lip (10 mm wide) was taken for dimorphism of right mandibular canine is proved to be
the study as this area is almost always visible in any trace higher than that of left mandibular canine. Males have larger
and determination of the pattern depends on the numerical tooth and arch dimensions and found to be statistically
superiority of the lines.[12] significant with 89% accuracy.

In our study, no two lip prints match with each other, The comparison and correlation of the lip prints, MCI,
thus suggesting the distinctiveness of lip prints. In and fingerprints did not yield any significant statistical

Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences / Volume 10 / Issue 3 / September-December 2018 149

[Downloaded free from http://www.jfds.org on Sunday, September 6, 2020, IP: 139.194.72.154]

Bai, et al.: Correlative study on lip prints, fingerprints, and mandibular intercanine distance

significance. However, a study by Nagasupriya et al.[8] has among lip print pattern, finger print pattern and ABO blood group.
drawn a significant correlation between vertical type of J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8:49‑51.
lip prints, arch‑type fingerprints in females, and branched 5. Hosmani JV, Nayak RS, Kotrashetti VS. Reliability of mandibular
canines as indicators for sexual dichotomy. J Int Oral Health
type of lip print with arch type in males. However, this pilot
2013;5:1‑7.
study tried to correlate all the three parameters, but the
6. Padmavati  K, Vakar  M, Afroz  A, Ather  S. Mandibular canine
interpretations derived from this study are precluded by index – A tool for sex determination. J Int Dent Antrophol
limited sample size. A more extensive and detailed research 2011;1:18‑20.
in a more logical manner is required to authenticate our 7. Tandon A, Sircar K, Chowdhry A, Babiani D. Comparative analysis
findings. As the sampling in our case was purposive with the of lip and finger print patterns for sex determination. J Forensic
sole objective of identification and gender determination of Odontostomatol 2013;31:120.
individuals in a setup which comprises heterogeneous mix 8. Nagasupriya A, Dhanapal R, Reena K, Saraswathi T,
of population, we could not draw any correlation. However, Ramachandran C. Patterns – “A crime solver”. J Forensic Dent Sci
2011;3:3‑7.
continuation of this work to include more subjects, and
9. Sangam MR, Babu AR, Krupadanam K, Anasuya K. Finger print
further validation of results may provide some clues of pattern in different blood groups. J Indian Acad Forensic Med 2011;
any correlation of these three parameters in identification 33.
in future. 10. Sandhu  SV, Bansal  H, Monga  P, Bhandari  R. Study of lip print
pattern in a Punjabi population. J Forensic Dent Sci 2012;4:24‑8.
Conclusions 11. Randhawa  K, Narang  RS, Arora  PC. Study of the effect of age
changes on lip print pattern and its reliability in sex determination.
As forensic science identification revolves around the four J Forensic Odontostomatol 2011;29:45‑51.
pillars of age, sex, race, and stature, we have made an attempt 12. Sivapathasundharam B, Prakash PA, Sivakumar G. Lip
prints (cheiloscopy). Indian J Dent Res 2001;12:234‑7.
to pilot study the pattern of three commonly used parameters
in a small, yet diverse group, with a purpose of preparing 13. Tsuchihashi Y. Studies on personal identification by means of lip
prints. Forensic Sci 1974;3:233‑48.
a blueprint of individuals. The pilot study confirmed
14. Kücken M, Newell AC. Fingerprint formation. J Theor Biol
the distinctiveness in cheiloscopy and MCI in gender 2005;235:71‑83.
determination but there was no statistical correlation between
15. Muller M, Lupi‑Pegurier L, Quatrehomme G, Bolla M.
lip prints, fingerprints, and MCI. Studying in depth and Odontometrical method useful in determining gender and dental
establishing further facts in the patterns will aid in population alignment. Forensic Sci Int 2001;121:194‑7.
subtyping. Thus, there is scope for use of these methods in 16. Kaushal S, Patnaik VV, Sood V, Agnihotri G. Sex determination
criminal investigations and personal identification. in North Indians using mandibular canine index. JIAFM 2004;26.
ISSN 0971-0973.
Financial support and sponsorship 17. Alvarez Segui M, Miquel Feucht M, Castello Ponce A,
Verdu Pascual  F. Persistent lipsticks and their lip prints: New
Nil.
hidden evidence at the crime scene. Forensic Sci Int 2000;112:41‑7.
18. Sudesh Gungadin MB. Sex determination from fingerprint ridge
Conflicts of interest density. Internet J Med Update 2007;2.
There are no conflicts of interest. 19. Namouchi I. Anthropological significance of dermatoglyphic trait
variation: An intra‑Tunisian population analysis. Int J Modern
References Anthropol 2011;1:12‑27.
20. Wijerathne BT, Rathnayake GK, Adikari SC, Amarasinghe S,
1. Verma  P, Sachdeva  SK, Verma  KG, Saharan  S, Sachdeva  K. Abhayarathna PL, Jayasena AS. Sexual dimorphism in digital
Correlation of lip prints with gender, ABO blood groups and dermatoglyphic traits among Sinhalese people in Sri Lanka.
intercommissural distance. N Am J Med Sci 2013;5:427‑31. J Physiol Anthropol 2013;32:27.
2. Ahuja P, Manchanda A. Application of oral hard and soft tissue 21. Yuwanati M, Karia A, Yuwanati M. Canine tooth dimorphism:
structures in sex determination. Internet J Forensic Sci 2009; 4. An adjunct for establishing sex identity. J Forensic Dent Sci
3. Mutalik  VS, Menon  A, Jayalakshmi  N, Kamath  A, Raghu  AR. 2012;4:80‑3.
Utility of cheiloscopy, rugoscopy, and dactyloscopy for human 22. Hashim HA, Murshid ZA. Mesiodistal tooth width. A comparison
identification in a defined cohort. J Forensic Dent Sci 2013;5:2‑6. between Saudi males and females. Part 1. Egypt Dent J
4. Srilekha N, Anuradha A, Vijay Srinivas G, Devi RS. Correlation 1993;39:343‑6.

150 Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences / Volume 10 / Issue 3 / September-December 2018