Biomarkers of fetal conditions: Finger ridge‐counts, facial fluctuating asymmetry, and digit ratio (2D:4D)—are they correlated in women?. Issue 2 (24th October 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Klimek, Magdalena; Galbarczyk, Andrzej; Nenko, Ilona; Jasienska, Grazyna
• Is Part Of: American journal of physical anthropology. Volume 174:Issue 2(2021)
• Page Start: 224
• Page End: 231
• Publication Date: 2020-10-24
• Subjects: asymmetry -- Developmental Origins of Health and Disease -- digit ratio -- fetal environment -- finger ridge‐counts; Physical anthropology -- Periodicals; Anthropology -- Periodicals; Anthropologie physique -- Périodiques; 599.9
• DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.24164
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0002-9483

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: Fetal environmental conditions are crucial for life‐long health. Direct measurements of developmental conditions are limited in humans; thus, several biomarkers of those conditions have been proposed: that is, finger ridge‐counts, level of facial fluctuating asymmetry (FA), and digit ratio (2D:4D). Since all of these biomarkers share a similar gestational time of formation, we hypothesize that their values are significantly correlated. Materials and methods: Data were collected at the Mogielica Human Ecology Study Site in southern Poland among 234 women. Finger ridge‐counts, level of facial FA, and 2D:4D have been measured. The two‐step analyses included Pearson's correlations of simple values of the biomarkers and correlations of composite variables calculated based on principal component analysis. Results: We did not find any statistically significant correlations between finger ridge‐counts, FA, and 2D:4D in women. Similarly, we did not observe any correlations between three composites created from the biomarkers. Discussion: Our results indicate that there are no relationships between the biomarkers, suggested as proxies of the quality of prenatal conditions, in a single population. This is the first study analyzing three different markers simultaneously. The lack of correlations may indicate that the tested biomarkers reflect, in fact, different environmental conditions, occurring in separate "critical windows" of development, or that the biomarkers are not valid as proxies of developmental conditions.