Abstract
The existing research comparing variation in developmental timing of skeletal and dental systems has focused on cross-sectional correlations of group means throughout late childhood. We used a longitudinal sample of 100 White American girls to compare developmental variation from 3-12 years to improve our understanding of developmental variation. The sample was divided into two sets (dental and skeletal) of three subgroups (delayed, average, or advanced) based on development at age three. Repeated measure ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD analyses examined the longitudinal maturation of: 1) skeletal development of skeletal subgroups, 2) dental development of skeletal subgroups, 3) dental development of dental subgroups, and 4) skeletal development of dental subgroups.
 The four models demonstrated significant differences between subgroup developmental trajectories. Pairwise comparisons of same-system development (analyses 1 and 3) found all comparisons to be significant; this was not the case for pairwise comparisons across systems (analyses 2 and 4). Only the advanced group was consistently different across all combinations.
 Results suggest that the pace of development differs among delayed, average, and advanced individuals, and between dental and skeletal systems. Therefore, to fully explore the relationship between the systems, the full range of variation in the timing of development is required.
Highlights
The existing research comparing variation in developmental timing of skeletal and dental systems has focused on cross-sectional correlations of group means throughout late childhood
This paper examines the skeletal and dental systems has long lent these whether the variation between the systems’ devel- systems to being used to estimate chronological opmental trajectories varies between individuals age
As the development of the skeletal and dental the average subgroup are included as a baseline systems roughly correspond to chronological age, with which to compare how the developmental it follows that the two systems should be correlattrajectories of delayed and advanced individuals ed
Summary
2020 │ Volume 33 │ Issue 01 ra of environmental, genetic, and epigenetic factors chronological age and either skeletal or dental age contributes to the range of variation. Studies which utilize correlations method developed for one population may not be do consider the entire range of variation accurate for another population This can result in (Anderson, Thompson, & Popovich, 1975; Arora, either under or overestimation of an individual’s 2009; Bagherpour et al, 2014; Lauterstein, 1961; developmental age (Haiter-Neto, Kurita, Menezes, Saglam & Gazilerli, 2002). Non-evolutionary related variation over time tive relationship between the skeletal and dental can occur This is secular change, which is of- systems is the same throughout the range of IVDT ten associated with variation in environments such by comparing the correlation of skeletal and dental as improved nutrition and increased caloric intake development between subgroups whose skeletal or (Garn, 1987). Wrist radiographs were used to measure skeletal and dental development
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
