INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2986
www.rsisinternational.org
The Dermatoglyphic Assessment of Umuahia Natives in Abia State
University, Uturu
1
Nkiruka Lilian Okwuanga,
2
Promise Nwachinemerem Okpechi,
3
Mbah Chikodili Adolphus,
4
Michael Obinna Onyewuchi,
5
Ejikeme Nkiru Suzan,
6
Dr. Lotanna Somtoo Akudu,
7
Onyinyechi
Queen Promise
1
Department of Anatomy, Abia State University, Uturu, P.M.B. 2000 Nigeria
2
Department of Anatomy, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria
3
Department of Anatomy, David Umahi Federal University of Health Sciences, No. 1 University
Avenue, Ununaga Way, Uburu, Ohaozara LGA, PMB 211, Ebonyi State Nigeria
4
Department of Anatomy, Rhema University, Nigeria
5
Department of Anatomy, College of Nursing Science Adazi Nnukwu, Nigeria
6
Department of Anatomy, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University, Uli Campus, Anambra
State, Nigeria
7
Department of Anatomy, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Nnewi Campus, Anambra, Nigeria
*
Corresponding Author
DOI:
https://dx.doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.1210000258
Received: 22 October 2025; Accepted: 30 October 2025; Published: 18 November 2025
ABSTRACT
Dermatoglyphic impressions and the effectiveness of friction ridge skin identification have been
demonstrated through experimentation, fingerprints are now incorporated into anthropometric records,
resulting in their increased usage. The research objectives include investigating the qualitative
dermatoglyphic features (arch, loop and whorl patterns) in both hands; and, the quantitative
dermatoglyphic features of total finger ridge count (TFRC) in both hands of Umuahia male and female
individuals. Fifty (50) male and female students each who are natives of Umuahia in Abia State
University, Uturu were examined using dermatoglyphics tool and interview-administered questionnaires.
The distribution in percentage and frequency of the right- and left-hand finger pattern dermatoglyphics
qualitative features of Umuahia reveal, ulnar loop, plain whorl, and plain arch patterns shown to be more
prevalent in females. The paired sample test confirmed observations, indicating that males have a higher
finger ridge count on the right hand and females have a higher finger ridge count on the left hand.
However, there is a positive correlation between the FRC of the two hands, indicating a consistent
relationship in ridge count between the right and left hands, particularly stronger in females compared to
males.
Keywords: Dermatoglyphics, Gender, Umuahia, Population
INTRODUCTION
The unique patterns on our fingertips are determined by a combination of genetics and environmental
factors, just like other aspects of our bodies (Kemelmacher-Shlizerman and Basri, 2011). There is a
theory that people in different locations have unique dermatoglyphic patterns, but it has not been
confirmed (Anyanwu, 2020). Throughout history, dermatoglyphics have provided insight into ethnic and
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2987
www.rsisinternational.org
ancestral origins (Mohammed et al., 2014; Fournier and Ross, 2016). Friction ridge skin impressions
have been utilized for identification purposes across various cultures for thousands of years (Jeffery,
2011).As the effectiveness of friction ridge skin identification was demonstrated through
experimentation, fingerprints were incorporated into anthropometric records, resulting in their increased
usage (Jeffery, 2011). In various workplaces and legal situations, human fingerprints are commonly
utilized for establishing one's biometric identity (Anyanwu, 2020). The absence of information regarding
fingerprint patterns among the people of Umuahia in Abia State led to the need for this study. Hence
there is a need to study the dermatoglyphic patterns among male and female Natives of Umuahia in Abia
State University, to determine the true dermatoglyphic pattern between them. Therefore, the research
objectives include investigating the qualitative dermatoglyphic features (arch, loop and whorl patterns)
in right and left hands; and, investigating the quantitative dermatoglyphic features of total finger ridge
count (TFRC) in right and left hands of Umuahia male and female individuals.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study Area and Population.
The study was conducted among Umuahia Male and Female indigenes in Abia state University, Uturu.
A total of one hundred (100) samples were collected, 50 male and 50 female subjects from Abia State
University, Uturu.
Eligibility Criteria
The following individuals will be excluded; individuals with any hand deformity like permanent scars on
fingers which may be congenital or acquired due to trauma on fingers; individuals suffering from any
chronic skin disease, having worn fingerprints or extra or bandaged finger; individuals outside the age
range of 16 – 40; persons whose grandparents and parents are of Igbo origin in Umuahia; and, any
individual that does not want to participate despite being eligible.
Equipment
The equipment used in this study include a HP Scanjet G3110 (digital photo scanner); a laptop; an
AutoCAD software version 2014; writing materials (book and pen); a washing hand bowl, toilet soap
and hand towel; a light source; a calculator; and, a handkerchief.
Data Collection
50 male and 50 female students who are from Umuahia in Abia state university, Uturu was examined
using dermatoglyphics tool and interview-administered questionnaires to confirm their state of origin as
regards to our study group. The male and female subjects willingly gave their consent to participate in
the study. The subject’s palmprints was obtained by placing their palms on a HP Scanjet with the thumb
300-400 along the other digits 10-150 abducted. This is a necessary to produce clear palmprints.
A digital scanner and HP Scanjet G3110 connected to a laptop was used to obtain bilateral palmprints of
each subject. The palms were clean-dried thoroughly and placed gently on the scanner without exerting
force and with all ten digits touching the surface of the scanner. The palmprints were taken and recorded
in a jpeg format in a laptop. The pattern ridges of arches, whorls and loops will be counted according to
the standard technique of Cummins and Midlo, 1926. Interpretation of prints will be done according to
Cummins and Midlo (1961) and Penrose and Loesch (1963) which includes identification of patterns,
finger ridge count and Total finger ridge count.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2988
www.rsisinternational.org
Figure 1: An Image showing data collection
Data Analysis
Data were analysed using SPSS for windows version 25 and statistical analysis system. All data were
tabulated and statistically treated. Descriptive statistics were used to establish significant frequencies in
the sample. The comparative analysis was done using analysis of variance. The correlation analysis was
done to determine the Finger Ridge Count (FRC) and Total Finger Ridge Count (TFRC). The Chi-square
test of significance was also computed to determine whether there are significant differences in the
occurrences of patterns in every individual. All inferential statistical analysis was carried out at a 95%
confidence level, with P <0.05 as the significant value. The results are represented in form of tables and
bar charts.
RESULTS
Normal distribution in percentage and frequency of the right- and left-hand finger pattern
dermatoglyphics qualitative features of Umuahia. Table 1: Right hand fingerprint pattern of
Males
Right
Hand
AW
CPLW
DLW
PA
RL
TA
UL
TOTAL
Thumb
2
(0.8%)
2 (0.8%)
0 (0%)
8 (3.2%)
0 (0%)
2 (0.8%)
20
(8.0%)
50
(20%)
Index
1
(0.4%)
5 (2.0%)
2 (0.8%)
7 (2.8%)
2 (0.8%)
1 (0.4%)
22
(8.8%)
50
(20%)
Middle
1
(0.4%)
4 (1.6%)
0 (0%)
5 (2%)
1 (0.4%)
2 (0.8%)
26
(10.4%)
50
(20%)
Ring
1
(0.4%)
2 (0.8%)
0 (0.0%)
1 (0.4%)
0 (0%)
2 (0.8%)
24
(9.6%)
50
(20%)
Little
4
(1.6%)
8 (3.2%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
2 (0.8%)
1 (0.4%)
30
(12%)
50
(20%)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2989
www.rsisinternational.org
TOTAL
9
(3.6%)
21
(8.4%)
2 (0.8%)
21
(8.4%)
5 (2%)
8 (3.2%)
122
(48.8%)
250
(100%)
X
2
=
47.70
P = 0.01
Table 2: Left hand fingerprint pattern of Males
Left
Hand
AW
CPLW
DLW
PA
PW
RL
TA
UL
TOTAL
Thumb
0 (0%)
1 (0.4%)
0 (0%)
11
(4.4%)
11
(4.4%)
2
(0.8%)
2 (0.8%)
23
(9.2%)
50
(20%)
Index
0 (0%)
2 (0.8%)
0 (0%)
3 (1.2%)
13
(5.2%)
6
(2.4%)
2 (0.8%)
24
(9.4%)
50
(20%)
Middle
0 (0%)
2 (0.8%)
0 (0%)
2 (0.8%)
10
(4.0%)
1
(0.4%)
3 (1.2%)
32
(12.8%)
50
(20%)
Ring
2 (0.8%)
4 (1.6%)
2 (0.8%)
1 (0.4%)
14
(5.6%)
1
(0.4%)
2 (0.8%)
24
(9.4%)
50
(20%)
Little
1 (0.4%)
3 (1.2%)
0 (0%)
2 (0.8%)
7 (2.8%)
3
(1.2%)
0 (0%)
34
(13.6%)
50
(20%)
TOTAL
3 (1.2%)
12
(4.8%)
2 (0.8%)
19
(7.6%)
55
(22%)
13
(5.2%)
9 (3.6%)
137
(54.8%)
250
(100%)
X2 =
49.00
P=0.01
Fig 2: Fingerprint pattern in the right hand of males.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2990
www.rsisinternational.org
Fig 3: Fingerprint pattern in the left hand of Males
Table 3: Right hand fingerprint pattern of Females
Right
hand
AW
CPLW
DLW
PA
PW
RL
TA
UL
TOTAL
Thumb
2 (0.8%)
0 (0%)
1 (0.4%)
9 (3.6%)
17
(6.8%)
1 (0.4%)
0 (0%)
20
(8%)
50
(20%)
Index
2 (0.8%)
1 (0.4%)
3 (1.2%)
13
(5.2%)
10
(4%)
5 (2%)
0 (0%)
16
(6.4%)
50
(20%)
Middle
1 (0.4%)
1 (0.4%)
1 (0.4%)
11
(4.4%)
6 (2.4%)
3 (1.2%)
2 (0.8%)
25
(10%)
50
(20%)
Ring
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
3 (1.2%)
15
(6%)
4 (1.6%)
0 (0%)
28
(11.2%)
50
(20%)
Little
0 (0%)
2 (0.8%)
0 (0%)
2 (0.8%)
4 (1.6%)
5 (2%)
0 (0%)
37
(14.8%)
50
(20%)
TOTAL
5 (2%)
4 (1.6%)
5 (2%)
38
(15.2%)
52
(20.8%)
18
(7.2%)
2 (0.8%)
126
(50.4%)
250
(100%)
X
2
=
59.45
P = 0.00
Table 4: Left hand fingerprint pattern of Females
Left Hand
AW
CPLW
DLW
PA
PW
RL
TA
UL
TOTAL
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2991
www.rsisinternational.org
Thumb
1
(0.4%)
0 (0%)
2 (0.8%)
10
(4%)
13
(5.2%)
2 (0.8%)
1 (0.4%)
21
(8.4%)
50
(20%)
Index
1
(0.4%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
9 (3.6%)
13
(5.2%)
3 (1.2%)
2 (0.8%)
22
(8.8%)
50
(20%)
Middle
1
(0.4%)
2 (0.8%)
0 (0%)
12
(4.8%)
8 (3.2%)
1 (0.4%)
3 (1.2%)
23
(9.2%)
50
(20%)
Ring
1
(0.4%)
4 (1.6%)
0 (0%)
4 (1.6%)
11
(4.4%)
2 (0.8%)
1 (0.4%)
27
(10.8%)
50
(20%)
Little
0 (0%)
1 (0.4%)
1 (0.4%)
0 (0%)
4 (1.6%)
2 (0.8%)
1 (0.4%)
41
(16.4%)
50
(20%)
TOTAL
4
(1.6%)
7 (2.8%)
3 (1.2%)
35
(14%)
49
(19.6%)
10
(4%)
8 (3.2%)
134
(53.6%)
250
(100%)
X
2
= 47.23
P = 0.01
Fig 4: Fingerprint pattern in the right hand of female
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2992
www.rsisinternational.org
Fig 5: Fingerprint pattern in the Left hand of females
Comparison of frequency distribution of the right- and left-hand finger pattern dermatoglyphics
qualitative features of Umuahia Male and Female participants.
Table 5: Comparison of frequency distribution of different finger patterns on both right and left
digits of Males
Fingers
AW
CPLW
DLW
PA
PW
RL
TA
UL
TOTAL
Thumb
Right
2
(2%)
2
(2%)
0
(0%)
8
(8%)
16
(16%)
0
(0%)
2
(2%)
20
(20%)
50
(50%)
X
2
= 5.94
df = 6 P
= 0.43
Left
0
(0%)
1
(1%)
0
(0%)
11
(11%)
11
(11%)
2
(2%)
2
(2%)
23
(23%)
50
(50%)
Total
2
(2%)
3
(3%)
0
(0%)
19
(19%)
27
(27%)
2
(2%)
4
(4%)
43
(43%)
100
(100%)
Index
Right
1
(1%)
5
(5%)
2
(2%)
7
(7%)
10
(10%)
2
(2%)
1
(1%)
22
(22%)
50
(50%)
X
2
= 8.70
df = 7 P
= 0.28
Left
0
(0%)
2
(2%)
0
(0%)
3
(3%)
13
(13%)
6
(6%)
2
(2%)
24
(24%)
50
(50%)
Total
1
(1%)
7
(7%)
2
(2%)
10
(10%)
23
(23%)
8
(8%)
3
(3%)
46
(46%)
100
(100%)
Middle
Right
1
(1%)
4
(4%)
0
(0%)
5
(5%)
11
(11%)
1
(1%)
2
(2%)
26
(26%)
50
(50%)
X
2
= 3.82
df = 6 P
= 0.70
Left
0
(0%)
2
(2%)
0
(0%)
2
(2%)
10
(10%)
1
(1%)
3
(3%)
32
(32%)
50
(50%)
Total
1
(1%)
6
(6%)
0
(0%)
7
(7%)
21
(21%)
2
(2%)
5
(5%)
58
(58%)
100
(100%)
Ring
Right
1
(1%)
2
(2%)
0
(0%)
1
(1%)
20
(20%)
0
(0%)
2
(2%)
24
(24%)
50
(50%)
X
2
= 56
df = 7 P
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2993
www.rsisinternational.org
Left
2
(2%)
4
(4%)
2
(2%)
1
(1%)
14
(14%)
1
(1%)
2
(2%)
24
(24%)
50
(50%)
= 0.65
Total
3
(3%)
6
(6%)
2
(2%)
2
(2%)
34
(34%)
1
(1%)
4
(4%)
48
(48%)
100
(100%)
Little
Right
4
(4%)
8
(8%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
5
(5%)
2
(2%)
1
(1%)
30
(30%)
50
(50%)
X
2
= 7.86
df = 6 P
= 0.25
Left
1
(1%)
3
(3%)
0
(0%)
2
(2%)
7
(7%)
3
(3%)
0
(0%)
34
(34%)
50
(50%)
Total
5
(5%)
11
(11%)
0
(0%)
2
(2%)
12
(12%)
5
(5%)
1
(1%)
64
(64%)
100
(100%)
Table 6: Comparison of frequency distribution of different finger patterns on both right and left
digits of Females
Fingers
AW
CPLW
DLW
PA
PW
RL
TA
UL
TOTAL
Thumb
Right
2 (2%)
0 (0%)
1 (1%)
9 (9%)
17
(17%)
1 (1%)
0 (0%)
20
(20%)
50
(50%)
X
2
= 2.61
df = 6 P =
0.86
Left
1 (1%)
0 (0%)
2 (2%)
10
(10%)
13
(13%)
2 (2%)
1 (1%)
21
(21%)
50
(50%)
Total
3 (3%)
0 (0%)
3 (3%)
19
(19%)
30
(30%)
3 (3%)
1 (1%)
41
(41%)
100
(100%)
Index
Right
2 (2%)
1 (1%)
3 (3%)
13
(13%)
10
(10%)
5 (5%)
0 (0%)
16
(16%)
50
(50%)
X
2
= 8.90
df = 7 P =
0.26
Left
1 (1%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
9 (9%)
13
(13%)
3 (3%)
2 (2%)
22
(22%)
50
(50%)
Total
3 (3%)
1 (1%)
3 (3%)
22
(22%)
23
(23%)
8 (8%)
2 (2%)
38
(38%)
100
(100%)
Middle
Right
1 (1%)
1 (1%)
1 (1%)
11
(11%)
6 (6%)
3 (3%)
2 (2%)
25
(25%)
50
(50%)
X
2
= 2.95
df = 7 P =
0.89
Left
1 (1%)
2 (2%)
0 (0%)
12
(12%)
8 (8%)
1 (1%)
3 (3%)
23
(23%)
50
(50%)
Total
2 (2%)
3 (3%)
1 (1%)
23
(23%)
14
(14%)
4 (4%)
5 (5%)
48
(48%)
100
(100%)
Ring
Right
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
3 (3%)
15
(15%)
4 (4%)
0 (0%)
28
(28%)
50
(50%)
X
2
= 7.44
df = 6 P =
0.28
Left
1 (1%)
4 (4%)
0 (0%)
4 (4%)
11
(11%)
2 (2%)
1 (1%)
27
(27%)
50
(50%)
Total
1 (1%)
4 (4%)
0 (0%)
7 (7%)
26
(26%)
6 (6%)
1 (1%)
55
(55%)
100
(100%)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2994
www.rsisinternational.org
Little
Right
2 (2%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
2 (2%)
4 (4%)
5 (5%)
0 (0%)
37
(37%)
50
(50%)
X
2
= 5.82
df = 6 P =
0.44
Left
1 (1%)
0 (0%)
1 (1%)
0 (0%)
4 (4%)
2 (2%)
1 (1%)
41
(41%)
50
(50%)
Total
3 (3%)
0 (0%)
1 (1%)
2 (2%)
8 (8%)
7 (7%)
1 (1%)
78
(78%)
100
(100%)
Evaluating mean and standard error of mean in finger ridge count (FRC)
Table 7: Relationship between right and left finger ridge count (FRC) in males and females
Sex
FRC
Mean ± SE
Paired T Test
Pearson correlation
T-value
P-value
T-Value
P-value
Male(N=50)
Right
67.20±1.88
1.310
0.196
0.330
0.019
Left
64.24±2.02
Female(N=50)
Right
65.00±1.98
-1.082
0.284
0.534
0.000
Left
67.06±1.97
Evaluating mean and standard error of mean in total finger ridge count (TFRC).
Table 8: Relationship between right and left total finger ridge count (TFRC) in male and female
Sex
Mean ± SE
Independent T-Test
Pearson Correlation
T-value
P-value
P-value
Sig.
Total Finger Ridge Count
Male
131.30 ± 3.20
-0.137
0.891
0.086
0.553
Female
131.94 ± 3.39
DISCUSSION
Fingerprints are unique, difficult to alter (Huynh et al., 2015) and made up mostly of water with organic
and
inorganic components (Cadd et al., 2015). Contaminants like cosmetics, drugs, and food residues may
also be present (Khare and Singla, 2022). Fingerprint patterns on fingertips are hereditary, with
similarities between monozygotic twins and less similarity with dizygotic twins. 12 dermatoglyphic
characteristics have significant heritability and are inherited through Mendelian transmission with
additional effects from major genes (Machado et al., 2010). Fingerprints are determined by genes and
environment, with environmental factors causing slight differences. The influence of genetics on the
environment is not completely clear, but one study found that 5% of the variability is due to
environmental factors. There are different models for how fingerprints form, such as buckling instability
in the basal cell layer or changes in amniotic fluid surrounding each finger. These factors affect each
finger differently, resulting in unique but similar patterns (Kücken and Newell, 2005; Kücken, 2007).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2995
www.rsisinternational.org
Qualitative Dermatoglyphic Features
Our study just like most of the African studies conducted in Tunisia, Ghana, Kenya and Tanzania
reported the ulnar loop as their most predominant pattern which was consistent with different studies.
Africans have been more associated with the ulnar loop as compared to the whorls and arches linked
with Asians, Tibetans' and Eskimos (Bandameedi et al., 2016).
The ulnar loop pattern was found to be prevalent in both male and female subjects in this study, with a
higher occurrence in females compared to males. The left hand exhibited higher ulnar loop values than
the right hand for both genders. These findings align with previous studies (Ekanem, 2009; Ezejindu et
al., 2015; Iso et al., 2019) that also reported ulnar loops as the most prevalent fingerprint pattern, with
females showing a higher occurrence of ulnar loops.
The radial loop pattern was observed in all left hands for males and females, with females showing
higher occurrence and values. The occurrence of radial loops varied between the right and left hands for
males, while females exhibited a similar occurrence in both hands. These results are consistent with the
findings of Ezejindu et al. (2015) and indicate a gender-specific difference in the prevalence and
distribution of radial loops among Umuahia subjects.
Plain whorls were found to be prevalent in both male and female subjects, with males showing higher
occurrence and values compared to females. The right hand exhibited higher values of plain whorls
compared to the left hand for both genders, suggesting a potential dominance of this pattern in the right
hand. These findings are in line with previous studies (Ekanem, 2009; Iso et al., 2015) that also reported
plain whorls as common fingerprint patterns.
The accidental whorl pattern showed a low occurrence in both male and female subjects, with males
having a slightly higher occurrence and values than females. The occurrence of accidental whorls was
predominantly observed in the right hand for both genders. These results align with previous research by
Ekanem (2009) and Ezejindu et al. (2015), indicating the relative rarity of accidental whorls among
Umuahia subjects.
Central pocket loop whorls were present in both male and female subjects, with males showing a higher
occurrence compared to females. The right hand exhibited higher values of central pocket loop whorls
for males, while females showed left-hand dominance. These findings are consistent with previous
studies (Ekanem, 2009; Ezejindu et al., 2015) that also reported a higher prevalence of central pocket
loop whorls in males.
The double loop whorl pattern was found to be absent in most digits of both male and female subjects,
indicating its relative rarity in the Umuahia population. Females exhibited a higher occurrence and
values of double loop whorls on the right hand, particularly on the right index finger. These results
contrast with the findings of Ezejindu et al. (2015), highlighting potential variations in the prevalence
and distribution of double-loop whorls. Plain arches were observed in both male and female subjects,
with females showing higher occurrence and values compared to males. The right hand exhibited higher
values of plain arches compared to the left hand for both genders. These findings are consistent with
previous studies (Ekanem, 2009; Ezejindu et al., 2015) that also reported a higher prevalence of plain
arches in females.
Tented arches were present in both male and female subjects, with males showing a higher occurrence in
the left hand, while females exhibited left-hand dominance. The results for tented arches do not align
with previous studies (Ekanem, 2009; Ezejindu et al., 2015), suggesting potential variations in the
prevalence and distribution of tented arches among different populations.
Therefore, the ulnar loop, plain whorl, and plain arch patterns were shown to be more prevalent in
females, whereas central pocket loop whorl, tented arch, accidental whorl, and double loop whorl had
relatively low frequencies in both sexes. There were also differences between both genders when the
fingers were compared, though, it was not significant. This is different from the works of Yusuf et al.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2996
www.rsisinternational.org
(2019) who reported that males have a higher prevalence of ulnar, arch and radial loops while females
have whorl as a prevalent pattern and that there were significant differences between the genders’
patterns. The difference between our study could be the fact that they studied a different ethnic group
(Ebira Ethnic Group of Kogi State) while we looked at the Igbos. Similar to what was previously stated,
gender variations in trait heritability from the parents and developmental variation between genres may
be the causes of the observed gender differences in fingerprint patterns (Kücken and Newell, 2005;
Kücken, 2007; Machado et al., 2010; Imene, 2011; Alhaji et al., 2015).
Quantitative Dermatoglyphic Features of Finger Ridge Count (FRC) and Total Finger Ridge
Count (TFRC)
The patterns on one's fingerprints reveal various properties that reflect their biology. These traits, such as
ridge count, density, thickness ratio, width, and pattern type, can be used to determine an individual's
gender. Statistical analysis shows that there are variations in these traits between males and females
(Kralík and Novotny, 2003). It is an established fact that the majority of individuals exhibit a greater
number of ridges on their right hand (R >) as compared to their left hand (L >). This particular
asymmetry has been found to be linked to male-typical performance on sexually dimorphic tasks in
those with R >, while those with L > tend to display female-typical performance. It is worth noting that
these observations are primarily seen in adults (Sanders and Kadam, 2001).
The quantitative analysis of
finger ridge count in this study revealed interesting findings. The results from Table 7 showed that males
had a higher finger ridge count on the right hand (67.20±1.88) compared to the left hand (64.24±2.02).
On the other hand, females had a higher finger ridge count on the left hand (67.06±1.97) compared to the
right hand (65.00±1.98). The paired sample test confirmed these observations, indicating that males have
a higher finger ridge count on the right hand and females have a higher finger ridge count on the left
hand. These findings are in accordance with a previous study conducted by Imene (2011), which
reported that males tend to have a higher finger ridge count on the right hand, while females have a
higher finger ridge count on the left hand. Additionally, the results of the t-tests indicated no significant
differences in finger ridge counts between sexes. However, there is a positive correlation between the
FRC of the two hands, indicating a consistent relationship in ridge count between the right and left
hands, particularly stronger in females compared to males. Furthermore, when considering the TFRC,
which is the sum of ridge counts for all ten fingers, we observed that the mean TFRC for males is 131.30
± 3.20, while for females it is 131.94 ± 3.39. This indicates that the TFRC of females is higher than that
of our male participants. This signifies sexual dimorphism. This is in support of a study by Igbigbi and
Msamati (1999) in Malawi where the female participants had higher TFRC than the males. This is
different from another study by Igbigbi and Msamati (2002) among Sub-Saharan Africans (SSAs) that it
was been observed that Zimbabwean men tend to have higher TFRC values than women. According to a
study conducted by Hajn and Gasiorowski in 1999 on Czech and Polish populations, it was found that
men had a higher TFRC than women. This aligns with the results of a study on the Araucanian Indians
from Patagonia, which also showed sexual differences, with TFRC being more significant in men, as
reported by Arquimbau et al. in 1993. Kar et al. (2012) in a study in India reported that males have
higher TFRC than females. However, statistical analysis did not reveal a significant difference between
the left and right hands in both males and females.
CONCLUSION
This study revealed valuable insights into the dermatoglyphic features of Umuahia male and female
indigene in Abia State University, Uturu. The findings demonstrated that the ulnar loop pattern was the
most prevalent fingerprint pattern among both male and female subjects, which aligns with previous
research. The frequency distribution of patterns showed a consistent order of occurrence, with ulnar
loop, plain whorl, plain arch, radial loop, central pocket loop whorl, tented arch, accidental whorl, and
double loop whorl. These results contribute to our understanding of the dermatoglyphic features specific
to the Umuahia population and provide a foundation for further research in this field.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2997
www.rsisinternational.org
RECOMMENDATION
More research work in line with the present study should be following;
Research should be encouraged in comparative dermatoglyphics studies in other related areas of health
and diseases, dermatoglyphics and congenital malformation of the hand and feet etc. in same population
Research should be encouraged in dermatoglyphics comparisons for male and female individuals of
other parts of Abia State.
Research should be encouraged in dermatoglyphics and behavioral study as well as on mental health
Contribution to Knowledge
This study’s findings will rebound to society’s benefit, considering that dermatoglyphics plays a vital
role in science and technology today. This present research work aimed at establishing the true
dermatoglyphic pattern between Umuahia Male and female natives in Abia state, University, Uturu and
it is totally Anthropological research which is mainly of Biological, physical, medical anthropology and
spice with cultural anthropology.
REFERENCES
1. Alhaji, M. M., Timbuak, J. A., Umana, U. E., & Tanko, M. (2015). Palmar creases and
handedness in Hausas of northern Nigeria: a cross-sectional study. Asian Journal of Biological
and Medical Sciences, 1(02), 6-13.
2. Anyanwu L. C. (2020). Variations of finger dermatoglyphics among the Esan ethnic group of
Edo State, Nigeria. International Journal of Modern Anthropology, 2(14), 275–289.
3. Bandameedi, L., Yerukala, K., & Mohammed, A. K. (2016). Study of fingerprint patterns in
relation to gender and blood group. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences,
5(14), 630-633.
4. Cadd, S., Islam, M., Manson, P., & Bleay, S. (2015). Fingerprint composition and aging: A
literature review. Science & justice: journal of the Forensic Science Society, 55(4), 219–238.
5. Cummins, H., & Midlo, C. (1926). Palmar and plantar epidermal ridge configurations in
European Americans. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 9(4), 471-502.
6. Cummins, H., & Midlo, C. (1961). Finger Prints, Palms and Soles: An Introduction to
Dermatoglyphics. Dover, New York.
7. Ekanem, E., Elmva, M., Udoaffah, G., Ekanem, T., & Akpantah, A. (2008). Digital
dermatoglyphic patterns of Annang ethnic group in Akwa Ibom State of Nigeria. International
Journal of Biological Anthropology, 3(1), 1282.
8. Ezejindu, D. N., Anyabolu, A. E., Asomugha, A. L., Ukoha, U., Chukwujekwu, I. E.,
Ezejiofor, O. F., Enemuo, E. H., & Ezeoko, T. J. (2015). Digital Dermatoglyphic patterns of
Igbo Tribe of South East, Nigeria. World Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, 4(06), 990-996.
9. Fournier, N. A., & Ross, A. H. (2016). Sex, Ancestral, and pattern type variation of fingerprint
minutiae: A forensic perspective on anthropological dermatoglyphics. American journal of
physical anthropology, 160(4), 625–632.
10. Hajn, V., & Gasiorowski, A. (1999). Quantitative values on fingers and palms in Czech and
Polish populations. Biologica, 37, 107-115.
11. Huynh, C., Brunelle, E., Halámková, L., & Agudelo, J. (2015). Forensic Identification of
Gender from Fingerprints. Analytical Chemistry, 87(22), 15-36.
12. Igbigbi, P. S., & Msamati, B. C. (1999). Palmar and digital dermatoglyphic patterns in
Malawian subjects. East African Medical Journal, 76, 668-671.
13. Igbigbi, P. S., & Msamati, B. C. (2002). Palmar and digital dermatoglyphics of indigenous
black Zimbabweans. Medical Science Monitor, 8, 757-761.
14. Imene, N. (2011). Dermatoglyphic trait variation: an intra-Tunisian population analysis.
International Journal of Modern Anthropology, 4, 12-27.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2998
www.rsisinternational.org
15. Iso, I. U., Msembe, O. E., & Ewunonu, E. 0. (2019). Sex variations in fingerprint ridge count
of a Nigerian population in Calabar municipality. Anatomy Journal of Africa, 8(2), 1544-
1551.Yusuf, A. O., Danborno, B., & Timbuak, J. A. (2019). Dermatoglyphic Patterns Among
Adolescents of the Ebira Ethnic Group of Kogi State, Nigeria. Journal of Morphological
Sciences, 36(4), 261-268.
16. Jeffery, G. B. (2011). National Institute of Justice. The fingerprint source book. US: U.S.
Department of Justice.
17. Kar, S., Krishnan, A., Bhakta, A., & Dongre, A. (2012). Digito-palmar dermatoglyphics in
vitiligo – A case control study. Journal of the Saudi Society of Dermatology & Dermatologic
Surgery, 16(2), 61–66.
18. Kemelmacher-Shlizerman, I., & Basri, R. (2011). 3D face reconstruction from a single image
using a single reference face shape. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine
intelligence, 33(2), 394405.
19. Khare, V., & Singla, A. (2022). A review on the advancements in chemical examination of
composition of latent fingerprint residues. Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 12(1), 6.
20. Kralík, M., & Novotny, V. (2003). Epidermal ridge breadth: an indicator of age and sex in
paleodermatoglyphics. Variability and Evolution, 11, 5–30.
21. Kücken M. (2007). Models for fingerprint pattern formation. Forensic science international,
171(2-3), 85–
22. Kücken, M., & Newell, A. C. (2005). Fingerprint formation. Journal of theoretical biology,
235(1), 71–
23. Machado, J. F., Fernandes, P. R., Roquetti, R. W., & Filho, J. F. (2010). Digital
dermatoglyphic heritability differences as evidenced by a female twin study. Twin research
and human genetics: the official journal of the International Society for Twin Studies, 13(5),
482–489.
24. Mohammed, B., Garba, S. H., & Adeyemi, L. B. (2014). Digital dermatoglyphics patterns of
the Kanuri Ethnic Group of North Eastern Nigeria. International Journal of Innovation and
Applied Studies, 9(2), 985–988.
25. Sanders, G., & Kadam, A. (2001). Prepubescent children show the adult relationship between
dermatoglyphic asymmetry and performance on sexually dimorphic tasks. Cortex; a journal
devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior, 37(1), 91–100.