Maxillary molar root and canal morphology of Neolithic and modern Chinese

This study aimed to characterize Neolithic human maxillary molars from archeological remains at the Jiaojia site, Shandong, China, and compare their ultrastructural features with sex and age-matched modern locals. Maxillary first (n = 86) and second (n = 80) molars in 5000-year-old individuals (n = ...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of oral biology 2021-11, Vol.131, p.105272-105272, Article 105272
Hauptverfasser: Ren, H.Y., Kum, K.Y., Zhao, Y.S., Yoo, Y.J., Jeong, J.S., Perinpanayagam, Hiran, Wang, X.Y., Li, G.J., Wang, F., Fang, H., Gu, Y.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 105272
container_issue
container_start_page 105272
container_title Archives of oral biology
container_volume 131
creator Ren, H.Y.
Kum, K.Y.
Zhao, Y.S.
Yoo, Y.J.
Jeong, J.S.
Perinpanayagam, Hiran
Wang, X.Y.
Li, G.J.
Wang, F.
Fang, H.
Gu, Y.
description This study aimed to characterize Neolithic human maxillary molars from archeological remains at the Jiaojia site, Shandong, China, and compare their ultrastructural features with sex and age-matched modern locals. Maxillary first (n = 86) and second (n = 80) molars in 5000-year-old individuals (n = 50) from the Jiaojia site were scanned by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Sex and age-matched control groups were assigned from oral surgical patients at Shandong University. Images were analyzed for crown size, root length, root morphology, canal inter-orifice distances, mesiobuccal canal morphology, and second mesiobuccal (MB2) canal prevalence and location. Neolithic and modern values were compared statistically using Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney test at p  .05) in Neolithic (53.3%) or modern (60.5%) first molars, and Neolithic (11.3%) or modern (21.3%) second molars. But, MB2 prevalence was significantly higher for modern than ancient male first (p = .032) and second (p = .005) molars. Additionally, MB2 were located more mesially and closer to MB1 in Neolithic than modern molars. Maxillary molar root and canal morphology of ancient 5000-year-old remains at the Jiaojia site resemble that of local patients. A trend towards larger tooth size, and more dispersed MB2 canals over this short evolutionary period warrants additional investigation. •Crown and root size were smaller in Neolithic maxillary molars than modern clinical cases.•Second mesiobuccal canals were less prevalent in Neolithic maxillary molars than their counterparts, especially in males.•Canal orifice locations were less dispersed in Neolithic than modern maxillary molars.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2021.105272
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2578769184</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0003996921002351</els_id><sourcerecordid>2578769184</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-3b8691f5cbd9955a27e676dbc4d6cf7a5dabc7eacf3f76620a9a42700e7a62f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNUD1PwzAUtBBIlMJ_CBtLiu3EdjyiiI9KBZbulmO_EFdJXOwUwb_HJQyMTKd3urunO4SuCV4RTPjtbqWD6XzQfeP8imJKEs-ooCdoQSohc8IwP0ULjHGRS8nlObqIcZdOxjlZoPWz_nR9r8NXNvgEWfB-yvRoM6NH3Scy7Dvf-7evzLfZC_jeTZ0zP4rBWwhjVnduhAiX6KzVfYSrX1yi7cP9tn7KN6-P6_puk5uS4ikvmopL0jLTWCkZ01QAF9w2prTctEIzqxsjQJu2aAXnFGupSyowBqE5bYsluplj98G_HyBOanDRQKowgj9ERZmoRPpQlUkqZ6kJPsYArdoHN6SqimB1XE_t1J_11HE9Na-XvPXshVTlw0FQ0TgYDVgXwEzKevePlG9OW39k</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2578769184</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Maxillary molar root and canal morphology of Neolithic and modern Chinese</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Ren, H.Y. ; Kum, K.Y. ; Zhao, Y.S. ; Yoo, Y.J. ; Jeong, J.S. ; Perinpanayagam, Hiran ; Wang, X.Y. ; Li, G.J. ; Wang, F. ; Fang, H. ; Gu, Y.</creator><creatorcontrib>Ren, H.Y. ; Kum, K.Y. ; Zhao, Y.S. ; Yoo, Y.J. ; Jeong, J.S. ; Perinpanayagam, Hiran ; Wang, X.Y. ; Li, G.J. ; Wang, F. ; Fang, H. ; Gu, Y.</creatorcontrib><description>This study aimed to characterize Neolithic human maxillary molars from archeological remains at the Jiaojia site, Shandong, China, and compare their ultrastructural features with sex and age-matched modern locals. Maxillary first (n = 86) and second (n = 80) molars in 5000-year-old individuals (n = 50) from the Jiaojia site were scanned by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Sex and age-matched control groups were assigned from oral surgical patients at Shandong University. Images were analyzed for crown size, root length, root morphology, canal inter-orifice distances, mesiobuccal canal morphology, and second mesiobuccal (MB2) canal prevalence and location. Neolithic and modern values were compared statistically using Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney test at p &lt; .05. Crown and root size were smaller, and canal inter-orifice distances were shorter in Neolithic maxillary molars than their modern counterparts. For mesiobuccal roots, Weine’s Type I single canals were the most prevalent in Neolithic and modern first and second molars. MB2 canal prevalence were not significantly different (p &gt; .05) in Neolithic (53.3%) or modern (60.5%) first molars, and Neolithic (11.3%) or modern (21.3%) second molars. But, MB2 prevalence was significantly higher for modern than ancient male first (p = .032) and second (p = .005) molars. Additionally, MB2 were located more mesially and closer to MB1 in Neolithic than modern molars. Maxillary molar root and canal morphology of ancient 5000-year-old remains at the Jiaojia site resemble that of local patients. A trend towards larger tooth size, and more dispersed MB2 canals over this short evolutionary period warrants additional investigation. •Crown and root size were smaller in Neolithic maxillary molars than modern clinical cases.•Second mesiobuccal canals were less prevalent in Neolithic maxillary molars than their counterparts, especially in males.•Canal orifice locations were less dispersed in Neolithic than modern maxillary molars.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-9969</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1506</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2021.105272</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Biological evolution ; Cone-beam computed tomography ; Dentistry ; Inter-orifice distance ; Maxillary molar root morphology ; Neolithic ; Second mesiobuccal canal</subject><ispartof>Archives of oral biology, 2021-11, Vol.131, p.105272-105272, Article 105272</ispartof><rights>2021 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-3b8691f5cbd9955a27e676dbc4d6cf7a5dabc7eacf3f76620a9a42700e7a62f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-3b8691f5cbd9955a27e676dbc4d6cf7a5dabc7eacf3f76620a9a42700e7a62f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003996921002351$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65534</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ren, H.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kum, K.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhao, Y.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yoo, Y.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jeong, J.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perinpanayagam, Hiran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, X.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, G.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fang, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gu, Y.</creatorcontrib><title>Maxillary molar root and canal morphology of Neolithic and modern Chinese</title><title>Archives of oral biology</title><description>This study aimed to characterize Neolithic human maxillary molars from archeological remains at the Jiaojia site, Shandong, China, and compare their ultrastructural features with sex and age-matched modern locals. Maxillary first (n = 86) and second (n = 80) molars in 5000-year-old individuals (n = 50) from the Jiaojia site were scanned by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Sex and age-matched control groups were assigned from oral surgical patients at Shandong University. Images were analyzed for crown size, root length, root morphology, canal inter-orifice distances, mesiobuccal canal morphology, and second mesiobuccal (MB2) canal prevalence and location. Neolithic and modern values were compared statistically using Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney test at p &lt; .05. Crown and root size were smaller, and canal inter-orifice distances were shorter in Neolithic maxillary molars than their modern counterparts. For mesiobuccal roots, Weine’s Type I single canals were the most prevalent in Neolithic and modern first and second molars. MB2 canal prevalence were not significantly different (p &gt; .05) in Neolithic (53.3%) or modern (60.5%) first molars, and Neolithic (11.3%) or modern (21.3%) second molars. But, MB2 prevalence was significantly higher for modern than ancient male first (p = .032) and second (p = .005) molars. Additionally, MB2 were located more mesially and closer to MB1 in Neolithic than modern molars. Maxillary molar root and canal morphology of ancient 5000-year-old remains at the Jiaojia site resemble that of local patients. A trend towards larger tooth size, and more dispersed MB2 canals over this short evolutionary period warrants additional investigation. •Crown and root size were smaller in Neolithic maxillary molars than modern clinical cases.•Second mesiobuccal canals were less prevalent in Neolithic maxillary molars than their counterparts, especially in males.•Canal orifice locations were less dispersed in Neolithic than modern maxillary molars.</description><subject>Biological evolution</subject><subject>Cone-beam computed tomography</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Inter-orifice distance</subject><subject>Maxillary molar root morphology</subject><subject>Neolithic</subject><subject>Second mesiobuccal canal</subject><issn>0003-9969</issn><issn>1879-1506</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNUD1PwzAUtBBIlMJ_CBtLiu3EdjyiiI9KBZbulmO_EFdJXOwUwb_HJQyMTKd3urunO4SuCV4RTPjtbqWD6XzQfeP8imJKEs-ooCdoQSohc8IwP0ULjHGRS8nlObqIcZdOxjlZoPWz_nR9r8NXNvgEWfB-yvRoM6NH3Scy7Dvf-7evzLfZC_jeTZ0zP4rBWwhjVnduhAiX6KzVfYSrX1yi7cP9tn7KN6-P6_puk5uS4ikvmopL0jLTWCkZ01QAF9w2prTctEIzqxsjQJu2aAXnFGupSyowBqE5bYsluplj98G_HyBOanDRQKowgj9ERZmoRPpQlUkqZ6kJPsYArdoHN6SqimB1XE_t1J_11HE9Na-XvPXshVTlw0FQ0TgYDVgXwEzKevePlG9OW39k</recordid><startdate>202111</startdate><enddate>202111</enddate><creator>Ren, H.Y.</creator><creator>Kum, K.Y.</creator><creator>Zhao, Y.S.</creator><creator>Yoo, Y.J.</creator><creator>Jeong, J.S.</creator><creator>Perinpanayagam, Hiran</creator><creator>Wang, X.Y.</creator><creator>Li, G.J.</creator><creator>Wang, F.</creator><creator>Fang, H.</creator><creator>Gu, Y.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202111</creationdate><title>Maxillary molar root and canal morphology of Neolithic and modern Chinese</title><author>Ren, H.Y. ; Kum, K.Y. ; Zhao, Y.S. ; Yoo, Y.J. ; Jeong, J.S. ; Perinpanayagam, Hiran ; Wang, X.Y. ; Li, G.J. ; Wang, F. ; Fang, H. ; Gu, Y.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-3b8691f5cbd9955a27e676dbc4d6cf7a5dabc7eacf3f76620a9a42700e7a62f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Biological evolution</topic><topic>Cone-beam computed tomography</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Inter-orifice distance</topic><topic>Maxillary molar root morphology</topic><topic>Neolithic</topic><topic>Second mesiobuccal canal</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ren, H.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kum, K.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhao, Y.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yoo, Y.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jeong, J.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perinpanayagam, Hiran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, X.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, G.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fang, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gu, Y.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of oral biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ren, H.Y.</au><au>Kum, K.Y.</au><au>Zhao, Y.S.</au><au>Yoo, Y.J.</au><au>Jeong, J.S.</au><au>Perinpanayagam, Hiran</au><au>Wang, X.Y.</au><au>Li, G.J.</au><au>Wang, F.</au><au>Fang, H.</au><au>Gu, Y.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Maxillary molar root and canal morphology of Neolithic and modern Chinese</atitle><jtitle>Archives of oral biology</jtitle><date>2021-11</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>131</volume><spage>105272</spage><epage>105272</epage><pages>105272-105272</pages><artnum>105272</artnum><issn>0003-9969</issn><eissn>1879-1506</eissn><abstract>This study aimed to characterize Neolithic human maxillary molars from archeological remains at the Jiaojia site, Shandong, China, and compare their ultrastructural features with sex and age-matched modern locals. Maxillary first (n = 86) and second (n = 80) molars in 5000-year-old individuals (n = 50) from the Jiaojia site were scanned by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Sex and age-matched control groups were assigned from oral surgical patients at Shandong University. Images were analyzed for crown size, root length, root morphology, canal inter-orifice distances, mesiobuccal canal morphology, and second mesiobuccal (MB2) canal prevalence and location. Neolithic and modern values were compared statistically using Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney test at p &lt; .05. Crown and root size were smaller, and canal inter-orifice distances were shorter in Neolithic maxillary molars than their modern counterparts. For mesiobuccal roots, Weine’s Type I single canals were the most prevalent in Neolithic and modern first and second molars. MB2 canal prevalence were not significantly different (p &gt; .05) in Neolithic (53.3%) or modern (60.5%) first molars, and Neolithic (11.3%) or modern (21.3%) second molars. But, MB2 prevalence was significantly higher for modern than ancient male first (p = .032) and second (p = .005) molars. Additionally, MB2 were located more mesially and closer to MB1 in Neolithic than modern molars. Maxillary molar root and canal morphology of ancient 5000-year-old remains at the Jiaojia site resemble that of local patients. A trend towards larger tooth size, and more dispersed MB2 canals over this short evolutionary period warrants additional investigation. •Crown and root size were smaller in Neolithic maxillary molars than modern clinical cases.•Second mesiobuccal canals were less prevalent in Neolithic maxillary molars than their counterparts, especially in males.•Canal orifice locations were less dispersed in Neolithic than modern maxillary molars.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.archoralbio.2021.105272</doi><tpages>1</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-9969
ispartof Archives of oral biology, 2021-11, Vol.131, p.105272-105272, Article 105272
issn 0003-9969
1879-1506
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2578769184
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Biological evolution
Cone-beam computed tomography
Dentistry
Inter-orifice distance
Maxillary molar root morphology
Neolithic
Second mesiobuccal canal
title Maxillary molar root and canal morphology of Neolithic and modern Chinese
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T15%3A21%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Maxillary%20molar%20root%20and%20canal%20morphology%20of%20Neolithic%20and%20modern%20Chinese&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20oral%20biology&rft.au=Ren,%20H.Y.&rft.date=2021-11&rft.volume=131&rft.spage=105272&rft.epage=105272&rft.pages=105272-105272&rft.artnum=105272&rft.issn=0003-9969&rft.eissn=1879-1506&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2021.105272&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2578769184%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2578769184&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0003996921002351&rfr_iscdi=true