Human Premolar Crown Sizes are Highly Variable Even in the Same Mouth, with Strong Crown Size Correlations among Premolars and All Molars Except the Third Molar
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The Inhibitory Cascade Model (ICM) predicts in mice that a larger permanent first molar (M1) results in a smaller second molar (M2) and an even smaller third molar (M3). Counter to the ICM, our lab found in contemporary humans that instead of M1 size, only M2 size predicts M3 size. Our lab also identified in humans 13 different molar size ratio patterns instead of one classic ICM pattern (M1>M2>M3). Further, other work in nonhuman primates reported a Premolar Molar Module (PMM) where sizes of the fourth premolar (P4) and all three molars are highly correlated. However, premolar:molar size correlation in contemporary humans is yet to be explored. This exploration can help define how the development of these two different classes of teeth influence each other’s sizes. In humans, M1 initiates near birth, followed ~24 months later by P3 and P4 (almost simultaneously with each other), then ~12 months later by M2, and ~6 years later by M3. Our first aim was to define variation in premolar size ratio pattern. We hypothesized that all three mathematically possible premolar size ratio patterns (P3=P4, P3>P4, P3<P4) will be observed in our sample. Our second aim was to test whether premolar crown size and size ratio predict molar absolute sizes and molar size ratio patterns (e.g., M1>M2>M3). We hypothesized that absolute sizes as well as size ratios of earlier initiating teeth will predict the absolute sizes and size ratios of later initiating teeth. Maximum mesiodistal lengths of P3, P4, M1, M2, and M3 crowns were measured in millimeters to represent absolute tooth sizes using retrospective Cone Beam Computed Tomography scans of 91 dental patients (54 female, 37 male) aged 13‐23 years. A frequency analysis revealed all three mathematically possible premolar size ratio patterns in our sample (P3>P4: 49.83%, P3<P4: 34.13%, and P3=P4: 16.04%, n=293 oral quadrants). Also, 57% (n=49) of the subjects with data collected from all four quadrants showed all three premolar size ratio patterns within the same mouth. A linear mixed model analysis (95% confidence level, alpha = 0.05) showed that P3 and P4 predicted each other’s crown size, as well as that of M2, but not M3. M1 size predicts P4 size only. In sum, we found that premolar size ratio patterns are highly variable even within the same oral cavity. We also found strong correlations among P3, P4 and M2 sizes, and between M1 and P4 sizes. Our results found variability in premolar size ratio patterns that is similar to the variability that we previously found in molar size ratio patterns. Our study in contemporary humans does not support the ICM prediction of a single classic tooth size ratio pattern. However, our study outcomes supported the PMM findings with the exception that P4 was not correlated with M3.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».