ELSEVIER Forensic Science International

75 (1995)73-78

Forensic Science

Intern;ltion;al

A study on estimation ofage from pubic symphysis

A. Sinha*“, V. Guptab

“Department of Forensic Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi - 110029, India

bDepurtment o/‘ Foorertsi~ Medicine, Lady Hurdinge Medical College, New Delhi - llOGO1, Indiu

Received 21 January 1994; revision received 20 April 1995; accepted 26 April 1995

Abstract

The present study has been carried on 82 pairs of pubic symphysis collected from fresh male cadavers. Various features were noted on the symphyseal surface - ridges and furrows, dorsal margin, ventral bevelling, lower extremity, ossific nodule, upper extremity, ventral rampart, dorsal plateau and symphyseal rim. Varying combination of these features were used as criteria for age estimation of the subjects.

Keywords: Age estimation; Pubic symphysis; Parameters

1. Introduction

Establishment of the identity of an individual is of utmost medico-legal signifi- cance, both in living and dead, especially in cases of impersonation, murder or mass disasters, where the bodies are grossly mutilated or in advanced stage of decompo- sition [I]. For identification, apart from sex which excludes almost half of the population, age is a rather more important criterion, which excludes a considerable portion of the population.

The changes in pubic symphysis are a reliable criterion of age estimation [2], with age range extending from the second to the fifth decade during which they are accurately correlated with the age changes in the long bones and skull. The present study has been carried out to study age-related metamorphic changes at the

* Corresponding author

0379-0738/95/$09.50 0 1995 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved SSDI 0379-0738(95)01772-B

74 A. Sinha, V. Gupta /Forensic Science International 75 (1995) 73-78

symphyseal surface of Indian pubic bones and to see whether they show a similar variation as compared to western standards. These changes have been compared with that of Todd’s [3-61 phase system for white males; Mckern and Stewart’s [7] three component system with five active developmental stages for males, and the method of Hanihara and Suzuki [9] who studied Japanese pubic bones using multiple regression analysis and quantification theory model 1. Hanihara [lo], Brooks [l l] and Pal and Tamankar [ 121 found that Todd’s criteria tended to underage the specimens.

2. Materials and methods

The sample consists of 82 pairs of male pubic bones collected from autopsy cases from Lady Hardinge Medical College and Associated Hospitals. The bones were collected from male autopsy cases of varying age. The age was precisely recorded from the police records (inquest papers). The age was further verified from municipal corporation records, i.e. birth certificate, etc. The cases were excluded from the study where there was some doubt about the age; where there was any pathology of the bones or where the bones under study were fractured. The bones were soaked in saturated solution of sodium chloride for 6-8 weeks, then boiled in water with a pinch of sodium carbonate for 20-25 min. All adherent soft tissues were removed and the bones were dried for 2 days. The following features were recorded on the symphyseal surface: (1) Ridges and furrows, (2) Dorsal margin, (3) Ventral bevelling, (4) Lower extremity, (5) Ossific nodule, (6) Upper extremity, (7) Ventral rampart, (8) Dorsal plateau, (9) Symphyseal rim.

3. Results

The sample spans a range of 12-75 years with the highest concentration in the twenties (38%). The results of the study can be listed as follows: (1) The symphyseal surface remains convex up to 19 years and becomes flat after 27 years. (2) The ridges and furrows are distinct till 17 years of age in males. The furrows become shallow between 18 to 26 years and disappear after 27 years. (3) The dorsal margin appears by 12 years in males and is complete after 18 years of age. (4) The dorsal plateau starts forming from 18 years in males and is complete after 35 years of age. (5) The ventral bevelling starts forming after 20 years in males. (6) The ventral rampart appears after 20 years in males and is well-developed after 35 years of age. (7) The inferior extremity shows its definition after 18 years in males and is well-defined after 30 years of age. (8) The superior extremity starts its definition after 22 years in males and is well-defined after 35 years.

A. Sinha, V. Gupta / Forensic Science international 75 (1995) 73-78 15

(9) The symphyseal rim starts its formation by 12 years in males from the lower part of the dorsal border. It starts on the ventral half after 20 years in males and is complete by 39 years. The rim starts to break down after 30 years, with 65.5% of males over 39 years showing this feature. (10) The ossific nodules are observed from 18 to 50 years in males. (11) Lipping on dorsal margin is observed above 30 years in males with 72.7% of cases above the age of 45 years showing this feature. (12) The disfigurement appears in 3.5% of males above the age of 40 years. (13) Variation on the two sides, right and left, are noted in 34.1% of males. (14) The variations observed in the progression of metamorphic features can be attributed to environmental and dietetic factors.

4. Discussion

Table 1 shows our data compared to Todd’s [3] phases for males. In Phase II and III, the mean in our series is 20.25 (S.D. 3.937) as compared to Todd’s 22.6154 (S.D. 1.2609); t is 2.0968 and P < 0.05. Thus, the mean age is significantly lower in our series in Phase II and III. In Phase IV and V, the mean is 26.4375 (SD. 3.3059) as compared to Todd’s 27.6111 (S.D. 1.6499); t is 1.3327 and P is not significant, implying that the difference in mean ages is not significant. In Phase VI, VII and VIII, the mean is 33.9412 (S.D. 6.5237) as compared to Todd’s 36.7556 (S.D. 3.4189); t is 2.2149 and P < 0.05. Thus, the mean age is significantly lower in Phase VI, VII and VIII. In Phase IX, the mean is 42.1429 (SD. 5.3984) as compared to Todd’s 47.4815 (S.D. 2.0071); t is 4.2582 and P < 0.001. Thus, the mean age is significantly lower in Phase IX. In Phase X, the mean is 58.0556 (S.D. 10.8816) as compared to Todd’s 65.675 (S.D. 9.9186); t is 2.6266 and P < 0.01. Hence,the mean age is significantly lower in Phase X. Our observations are in contrast to Hanihara [lo], Brooks [l l] and Pal and Tamankar [12] who found that Todd’s criteria tended to underage the specimens.

Table I Distribution of male pubic bones according to Todd’s phases [3]

Todd’s phase Age range (Todd) No. of cases Age range (Mean + 2 SE.)

I 18-19 0 II 20-21 12 III 22-24 12 IV 25-26 2 V 27-30 14 VI 30-35 6 VII 35-39 3 VIII 39-44 8 IX 45-50 6 X > 50 19

Total 82

16.693-20.141 19.917-24.249 17.928-32.072 25.150-28.136 33.623-39.711 32.742-40.592 36.345-40.405 40.809-44.907 50.597P60.771

16 A. Sinha. V. Gupta /Forensic Science hernational 75 (1995) 73-78

Table 2 Distribution of male pubic bones of this series according to Mckern and Stewart’s [7] symphyseal score method

Symphyseal score Age range (Mckern & Stewart) No. of cases Age range (Mean + 2 S.E.)

0 l-2

4-5 6-l 8-9 IO 11-13 I4 I5

< I7 17-20 18-21 18-23 20-24 22-28 23-28 23-39 > 29 > 36

-

0 4 0

I5 IO 8 3

20 I7

13.683-20.317

18.926-2 1.740 21.002-26.598 25.154-29.846 21.495-31.171 33.595-42.705 42.958-54.806 49.625-69.175

Total 82

When compared with Mckern and Stewart’s [7] Component stages, the develop- ment of dorsal margin is earlier in Indian bones. However, the completion of the dorsal plateau is delayed. The completion of ventral bevelling and rampart is delayed as against the formation of symphyseal rim, which starts earlier, but completes later in Indian bones. These results are akin to that of Pal and Tamankar [12]. A comparison of our data to Mckern and Stewart’s [7] Symphyseal Score method for males is shown in Table 2. In score 1-3, the mean in our series is 17 (S.D. 3.317) as compared to theirs 19.2 (S.D. 0.81); t is 2.074 and P < 0.05. Thus, the mean age is significantly lower in our series in score l-3. In score 4-5, the mean is 20.333 (S.D. 2.724) as compared to Mckern and Stewart’s 20.8 (S.D. 1.13); t is 2.436 and P < 0.01 implying that the mean age is significantly lower in score 445. In score 6-7, the mean is 23.8 (S.D. 4.423) as compared to Mckern and Stewart’s 22.4 (S.D. 0.99); t is 2.357 and P < 0.05. Thus, the mean age is significantly higher in our series in score 667. In score 8-9, the mean is 27.5 (S.D. 3.317) as compared to Mckern and Stewart’s 24.1 (S.D. 1.93); t is 2.091 and P < 0.001. Thus, the mean age is significantly higher in our series in score 8-9. In score 10, the mean is 26.333 (SD. 4.190) as compared to Mckern and Stewart’s 26.1 (S.D. 1.87); t is 2.443 and P < 0.05 implying that the mean age is significantly higher in our series in score 10. In score 11-13, the mean is 38.15 (S.D. 10.185) as compared to Mckern and Stewart’s 29.2 (S.D. 3.33); t is 2.201 and P < 0.05. Thus, the mean age is significantly higher in our series in score 1 l- 13. In score 14, the mean age is 48.882 (S.D. 12.213) as compared to Mckern and Stewart’s 35.8 (S.D. 3.89); t is 2.273 and P < 0.02. Thus, the mean age is significantly higher in our series in score 14. In score 15, the mean age is 59.4 (S.D. 10.929) as compared to Mckern and Stewart’s 41 (S.D. 6.22); t is 3.143 and P < 0.01. Hence, the mean age is significantly higher in our series in score 15. Keeping Gilbert’s [8] comments in view, the metamorphosis in our series sets in earlier by l-3 years, but the various bony features like dorsal plateau, etc., are found at a later age, which is in

A. Sinha, V. Gupra /Forensic Science Inrernational 75 (1995) 73-78 77

agreement with that of Pal and Tamankar [12]. The lacunae of Mckern and Stewart’s method lies within the age range given for score 14 and 15 as 29 + and 36 + years, which does not account for variability of age after 40 years, as pointed out by Katz and Suchey [13].

When compared to the method of Hanihara and Suzuki [9] using multiple regression analysis (MRA) (Table 3), there is an over estimation of 1 to 6 years until 30 years of age, while the ages are under-estimated by l-4 years between 31 to 39 years of age. The estimation becomes unreliable after 39 years, as the degree of under-estimation widens to 8- 17 years. These findings are similar to those of Hanihara and Suzuki [9].

By using the quantification theory Model-l (QM 1) of Hanihara and Suzuki, as shown in Table 3, the ages are over-estimated by l-6 years until 30 years of age, while they are under-estimated by 3-4 years between 31 to 39 years of age. The estimation becomes unreliable after 39 years. Our findings are in contrast to Hanihara and Suzuki [9] who found an under-estimation till 30 years and an over-estimation between 3 l-38 years.

The analysis of residuals in three age groups in Table 4 reveals higher values in our series as compared to Hanihara and Suzuki [9]. In age groups 1 and 2, the residuals are smaller in QM 1 than MRA, while the values are almost the same in age group 3 in both QM 1 and MRA. Thus, reliability of QM 1 is higher than MRA in the first two age groups, while the two methods show almost the same reliability in age group 3. These findings are akin to those of Hanihara and Suzuki [9].

Table 3 Estimation of age according to Hanihara and Suzuki [9], by multiple regression analysis (MRA) and quantification model analysis (QM 1)

Serial No. Age group (Hanihara & Suzuki)

No. of cases Age groups estimated by (Mean + 2 SE.)

MRA QM 1

1 < 17 7 20.004421.616 19.650-21.190 2 18-19 4 23.376-25.764 22.940-24.960 3 20-21 I 22.261-25.379 22.119-25.141 4 22224 9 23.085-27.955 22.836626.244 5 25526 8 26.834-28.346 25.541-28.439 6 27-30 8 28.047-30.793 27.589930.871 7 31-35 10 29.768-32.752 27.526631.094 8 36-39 4 33.163-34.997 31.672-34.808 9 40-44 6 31.602-35.038 30.377-34.343 10 45-50 9 29.815533.465 28.660&33.260 11 > 50 IO 34.075535.505 34.254436.466

Total 82

78 A. Sinha, V. Gupta /Forensic Science International 75 (1995) 73378

Table 4 Reliability of MRA and QM 1 in three age groups

Age group Residuals

MRA QM 1

1 (18-25 years) 2 (26-30 years) 3 (31-38 years)

73.63% 58.33% 47.49%) 39.63% 65.63% 64.79%

References

[I] N.J. Modi, Modi’s Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, N.M. Tripathi Private Ltd., Bombay, 1988, pp. 28843.

[2] W.M. Krogman and M.Y. &an, The Humun Skeleton in Forensic Medicine, CC. Thomas, Springfield, IL, 1986.

[3] T.W. Todd, Age changes in the pubic bone. I. The male White pubis. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 3 (1920) 285-334.

[4] T.W. Todd, 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 (1921) l-70.

[5] T.W. Todd, Age changes in the pubic bone. V. Mammalian pubic metamorphosis. Am. J. Phys. Anchropol., 4 (1921) 3366406.

[6] T.W. Todd, Age changes in the pubic bone. VI. The interpretation of variations in the symphyseal area. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 4 (1921) 407-424.

[7] T.W. Mckern and T.D. Stewart, Skeletal age changes in young American males. Analysed from the standpoint of age identification. Hqrs. QM. Res. Dee. Command, Tech. Rep. EP45, Natick, 1957.

[8] B.M. Gilbert and T.W.Mckern, A method for aging the female OS pubis. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 38 (1973) 31-38.

[9] K. Hanihara and T. Suzuki, Estimation of age from the pubic symphysis by means of multiple regression analysis. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 48 (1978) 233-240.

[lo] K. Hanihara, Estimation of age from the pubic symphysis by means of multiple regression analysis. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 48 (1952) 233-240.

[11] S.T. Brooks, Skeletal age at death: reliability of cranial and pubic age indicators. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 13 (1955) 5677597.

[12] G.P. Pal and B.P. Tamankar, Determination of age from pubic symphysis. Ind. J. Med. Res., 99 (1983) 694-701.

[13] D. Katz and J.M. Suchey, Aging the OS pubis : a modified phase system. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 69 (1986) 428-433.