Ancestry and dental development: A geographic and genetic perspective

Abstract

ObjectiveIn this study, we investigated the influence of ancestry on dental development in the Generation R Study.MethodsInformation on geographic ancestry was available in 3,600 children (1,810 boys and 1,790 girls, mean age 9.81 ± 0.35 years) and information about genetic ancestry was available in 2,786 children (1,387 boys and 1,399 girls, mean age 9.82 ± 0.34 years). Dental development was assessed in all children using the Demirjian method. The associations of geographic ancestry (Cape Verdean, Moroccan, Turkish, Dutch Antillean, Surinamese Creole and Surinamese Hindustani vs Dutch as the reference group) and genetic content of ancestry (European, African or Asian) with dental development was analyzed using linear regression models.ResultsIn a geographic perspective of ancestry, Moroccan (β = 0.18; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.28), Turkish (β = 0.22; 95% CI: 0.12, 0.32), Dutch Antillean (β = 0.27; 95% CI: 0.12, 0.41), and Surinamese Creole (β = 0.16; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.30) preceded Dutch children in dental development. Moreover, in a genetic perspective of ancestry, a higher proportion of European ancestry was associated with decelerated dental development (β = −0.32; 95% CI: –.44, –.20). In contrast, a higher proportion of African ancestry (β = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.43) and a higher proportion of Asian ancestry (β = 0.28; 95% CI: 0.09, 0.48) were associated with accelerated dental development. When investigating only European children, these effect estimates increased to twice as large in absolute value.ConclusionBased on a geographic and genetic perspective, differences in dental development exist in a population of heterogeneous ancestry and should be considered when describing the physiological growth in children.

Variation in dental morphology and inference of continental ancestry in admixed Latin Americans

“…Across traits, several significant positive correlations were observed, with the strongest occurring between SS and DS, in both upper and lower incisors. Possible explanations for these correlations include admixture linkage disequilibrium (particularly for traits present with high frequencies in parental populations) and pleiotropic effects of certain genetic variants influencing dental development (Dhamo et al, ; Hillson, ; Hughes & Townsend, ; Townsend, Hughes, Luciano, Bockmann, & Brook, ).…”

“…Furthermore, the biodistance analysis and the average estimates of ancestry in the Colombian sample obtained from dental morphological data are consistent with the genetic estimates of ancestry: a predominant European ancestry, with substantial Native American ancestry and a relatively small African contribution. The correlation of certain dental features with specific genetic ancestries suggests that aspects of tooth morphology are likely to be influenced by alleles differentiated in frequency between continental populations (see Hubbard, Guatelli‐Steinberg, & Irish, ; Rathmann et al, ), probably involving loci impacting on tooth development (Dhamo et al, ; Edgar & Ousley, ). The three traits correlated with African ancestry detected here (C5UM2, CNLM1, and C7LM1) have been reported to show markedly higher frequencies in Sub‐Saharan Africans relative to other continental populations (Irish, , ; Scott & Irish, ; Scott & Turner, ).…”

Deep orofacial phenotyping of population-based infants with isolated cleft lip and isolated cleft palate

“…Ancestral genetics and geographical factors were purported to play a part in odontogenic development and maturity in populations with different races. Those of Caucasian descent were reported to have lower odontogenic potential and slower tooth development 48 , 49 . In contrast, the London Atlas showed no difference in dental maturity between British children of Caucasian origin and British children of Bangladeshi origin, and no differences in children from eight countries 50 – 52 .…”

The association of maternal folic acid supplementation and prenatal folate and vitamin B12 concentrations with child dental development

“…The ICC for the scored teeth ranged between 0.65 and 0.80, which is considered to be ‘substantial’ agreement according to the conventional criteria. 29 , 33 Central incisors were not taken into account due to the absence of variation in the stage of tooth development fitting with age of the children.…”