Measurements of tooth diameters

The choice of a method of tooth size determination may have an important bearing on the results of an odontometric analysis. For instance, some authors advocated the use of maximum tooth measurements (e.g. Nelson, 1938; Moorrees & Reed, 1954; Tobias, 1967) whilst others preferred using the smaller, minimum, dimensions (e.g. Lavelle, 1972). Each of these measures may be appropriate for resolving a specific problem, yet none can be regarded as apposite for all possible analyses. Unfortunately methodological and terminological diversity have tended to obscure rather than clarify the field of dental mensuration. The buccolingual measurement (BL), for example, has been referred to as a thickness (Miyabara, 1916), a diameter (Nelson, 1938), a breadth (Selmer-Olsen, 1949; Schamschula, Barnes & Adkins, 1972) and a length (van Reenen, 1966). The mesiodistal measurement (MD), on the other hand, has been called a width (Miyabara, 1916; Seipel, 1946), a breadth (Selmer-Olsen, 1949; Oliver, I960) and a length (Hrdlička, 1952; Hunter & Priest, 1960; van Reenen, 1966; Schamschula et al., 1972).

In an attempt to standardise the terminology, Wolpoff (1969) argued that, because almost all teeth have a greater anterioposterior than mediolateral component, this measurement is justifiably described as a length. A breadth then, is the measurement perpendicular to it. However, the meaning of Wolpoff's terminology is unclear, since there are an infinite number of directions in a saggital plane.

Unfortunately, a profusion of measurement techniques cloud the field of odontometry. Some of the earlier methods of dental mensuration are described below, followed by a comparison of those methods that are currently in use.