International Journal of Legal Medicine

, Volume 132, Issue 2, pp 637–641 | Cite as

Setting the light conditions for measuring root transparency for age-at-death estimation methods

  • Joe Adserias-Garriga
  • Laia Nogué-Navarro
  • Sara C. Zapico
  • Douglas H. Ubelaker
Short Communication


Age‐at‐death estimation is one of the main goals in forensic identification, being an essential parameter to determine the biological profile, narrowing the possibility of identification in cases involving missing persons and unidentified bodies. The study of dental tissues has been long considered as a proper tool for age estimation with several age estimation methods based on them. Dental age estimation methods can be divided into three categories: tooth formation and development, post‐formation changes, and histological changes. While tooth formation and growth changes are important for fetal and infant consideration, when the end of dental and skeletal growth is achieved, post‐formation or biochemical changes can be applied. Lamendin et al. in J Forensic Sci 37:1373–1379, (1992) developed an adult age estimation method based on root transparency and periodontal recession. The regression formula demonstrated its accuracy of use for 40 to 70-year-old individuals. Later on, Prince and Ubelaker in J Forensic Sci 47(1):107–116, (2002) evaluated the effects of ancestry and sex and incorporated root height into the equation, developing four new regression formulas for males and females of African and European ancestry. Even though root transparency is a key element in the method, the conditions for measuring this element have not been established. The aim of the present study is to set the light conditions measured in lumens that offer greater accuracy when applying the Lamendin et al. method modified by Prince and Ubelaker. The results must be also taken into account in the application of other age estimation methodologies using root transparency to estimate age‐at‐death.


Age-at-death Biological profile Dental age estimation Light conditions 


  1. 1.
    Adams B (2007) Forensic anthropology. Chelsea House Publications, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adserias-Garriga J (2016) Forensic application of telomere shortening in age-at- death estimation. In: Mechanisms linking aging, diseases and biological age estimation. CRC Press, Boca Raton ISBN 9781498709699 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ahlqvist J, Damsten O (1969) A modification of Kerley’s method for the microscopic determination of age in human bone. J Forensic Sci 14(2):205–212PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bang G, Ramm E (1970) Determination of age in humans from root dentin transparency. Acta Odontol Scand 56:238–244Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brooks S (1955) Skeletal age at death: reliability of cranial and pubic age indicators. Am J Phys Anthropol 3:567–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brooks S, Suchey J (1990) Skeletal age determination base on the os pubis: a comparison of the Acsádi–Nemeskéri and Suchey–brooks methods. Hum Evol 5:227–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buckberry JL, Chamberlain AT (2002) Age estimation from the auricular surface of the ilium: a revised method. Am J Phys Anthropol 119(3):231–239CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cunha E, Baccino E, Martrille L, Ramsthaler F, Prieto J, Schuliar Y, Lynnerup N, Cattaneo C (2009) The problem of aging human remains and living individuals: a review. Forensic Sci Int 193(1–3):1–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elamin F, Liversidge HM (2013) Malnutrition has no effect on the timing of human tooth formation. PLoS One 8:e72274CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Falys CG, Prangle D (2015) Estimating age of mature adults from the degeneration of the sternal end of the clavicle. Am J Phys Anthropol 156(2):203–214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garn SM, Lewis AB, Kerewsky RS (1965) Genetic, nutritional and maturational correlates of dental development. J Dent Res 44:228–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gonzalez-Colmenares G, Botella-Lopez MC, Moreno-Rueda G, Fernandez-Cardenete JR (2007) Age estimation by a dental method: a comparison of Lamendin’s and Prince & Ubelaker’s technique. J Forensic Sci 52:1156–1160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gustafson G (1950) Age determination on teeth. Journal of American Dental Association 41:45–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harris EF, Mincer HH, Anderson KM, Senn DR (2010) Age estimation from oral and dental structures. In: Senn DR, Stimson PG (eds) Forensic dentistry, 2nd edn. Taylor & Frances Group, Boca Raton, pp 263–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Iscan MY, Loth SR, Wright RK (1984) Age estimation from the rib by phase analysis: white males. J Forensic Sci 29(4):1094–1104PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Iscan MY, Loth SR, Wright RK (1985) Age estimation from the rib by phase analysis: white females. J Forensic Sci 30(3):853–863PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Iscan MY, Loth SR, Wright RK (1987) Racial variation in the sternal extremity of the rib and its effect on age determination. J Forensic Sci 32(2):452–466CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Johanson G (1971) Age determinations from human teeth: a critical evaluation with special consideration of changes after fourteen years of age. Odontologisk Revy 22:1–126Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kerley ER (1965) The microscopic determination of age in human bone. Am J Phys Anthropol 23(1965):149–163CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kerley ER, Ubelaker DH (1978) Revisions in the microscopic method of estimating age at death in human cortical bone. Am J Phys Anthropol 49(4):545–546CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lamendin H, Baccino E, Humbert JF, Tavernier JC, Nossintchouk RM, Zerilli A (1992) A simple technique for age estimation in adult corpses: the two criteria dental method. J Forensic Sci 37:1373–1379CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lovejoy CO, Meindl RS, Pryzbeck TR, Mensforth RP (1985) Chronological metamorphosis of the auricular surface of the ilium: a new method for the determination of adult skeletal age at death. Am J Phys Anthropol 68(1):15–28CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maples WR, Rice WR (1979) Some difficulties in the Gustafson dental age estimations. J Forensic Sci 24:168–172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Meindl RS, Lovejoy CO (1985) Ectocranial suture closure: a revised method for the determination of skeletal age at death based on the lateral-anterior sutures. Am J Phys Anthropol 68(1):57–66. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.1330680106 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Prince DA, Ubelaker DH (2002) Application of Lamendin’s adult ageing technique to a diverse skeletal sample. J Forensic Sci 47(1):107–116CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stout SD, Paine RR (1992) Histological age estimation using rib and clavicle. Am J Phys Anthropol 87:111–115CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Todd TW (1920) Age changes in the pubic bone I: the male white pubis. Am J Phys Anthropol 3(1920):285–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Todd TW (1921a) Age changes in the pubic bone II. The pubis of the male negro–white hybrid. III the pubis of the white female. IV. The pubis of the female negro–white hybrid. Am J Phys Anthropol 4:1–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Todd TW (1921b) Age changes in the pubic bone VI: the interpretation of variations in the symphyseal area. Am J Phys Anthropol 4:407–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ubelaker DH, Parra RC (2008) Application of three dental methods of adult age estimation from intact single rooted teeth to a Peruvian sample. J Forensic Sci 53:608–611CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joe Adserias-Garriga
    • 1
  • Laia Nogué-Navarro
    • 2
  • Sara C. Zapico
    • 3
  • Douglas H. Ubelaker
    • 3
  1. 1.Fundació UdG: Innovació i FormacióUniversity of GironaGironaSpain
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of GironaGironaSpain
  3. 3.Department of Anthropology, NMNHSmithsonian InstitutionWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations