Keywords handedness - lateralization - tibeto-nepalese - indo-nepalese
Introduction
The political scientists Joshi and Rose broadly classify the Nepalese population into three major ethnic groups in terms of their origin: Indo-Nepalese (IN), Tibeto-Nepalese (TN), and Indigenous (IND). The first group, comprising those of IN origin, inhabits the more fertile lower hills, the river valleys, and the Terai plains adjoining the borders of India. The second major group consists of communities of TN origin occupying the higher hills from the west to the east.[1 ] The distribution of hand preference is J-shaped, reflecting the predominant use of the right hand.[2 ] The importance of handedness lies in its relationship with the lateralization of the brain function, especially of language.[3 ] The Geschwind-Behan-Galaburda theory states that the influence on early cell loss and prenatal levels of testosterone are related to cerebral lateralization and handedness.[4 ] The sexual dimorphism in the 2D:4D ratio is established as early in as the 9th week of fetal life. It is found in children, is little affected by puberty, and appears to be universal in human populations.[5 ]
[6 ]
[7 ]
[8 ]
The main objectives of the present study were:
To calculate the 2D:4D ratios of both hands of adult individuals from 2 different Nepalese ethnic groups (TN and IN) of both genders.
To study the correlation of the 2D:4D ratios with handedness or hand preference.
Materials and Methods
A population-based cross-sectional study was conducted among TN and IN subjects aged ≥ 18 years old of both genders from the Dharan municipality, in the Sunsari District of Eastern Nepal, using the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory[9 ] hand preference determination questionnaire and a separate pre-designed questionnaire for recording socio-demographic variables and length of the second and fourth digits of both hands. The sample size was calculated with an allowable error of 20% (95% confidence interval [CI]) by using the following formula:
Sample size (n ) = 4pq/L2
In which:
p = population proportion of positive character,
q = 1-p and
L = allowable error.
Hence:
Sample size (n ) = 4pq/L2 = 780 individuals
Thus, a total of 800 adults (≥ 18 years old) were recruited for the study of both ethnic groups, TN and IN (400 each), including both genders (200 males and 200 females in each ethnic group) by a systematic random sampling technique. The cutoff point for the age of the subjects was the end of January, so all of the participants had to be of a certain age on February 1st.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
Subjects with any apparent physical hand anomalies, inflammation, trauma, deformities and hand surgery
Subjects with any genetic, psychological, neurological or chronic diseases affecting hand parameters
Individuals who disagreed to take part in the study
Digit lengths ([Figs. 1 ], [2 ]) were measured on the ventral surface of the hand from the basal crease of the digit to the tip of the finger using a vernier caliper (Cescorf Equipamentos para Esportes, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil) with a precision of 0.01 mm. Then, they were reported on the questionnaire and the 2D:4D ratio was calculated. This technique of measuring digit length has been reported to have a high degree of repeatability.[10 ]
[11 ] Hand preference or handedness was determined according to the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory, which evaluates the direction and the degree of hand preference.[9 ]
Fig. 1 Measurement of the right 2nd digit length (a= basal crease; b= the tip of the finger and c= vernier caliper (Cescorf Equipamentos para Esportes, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil)
Fig. 2 Measurement of the right 4th digit length (a= basal crease; b= the tip of the finger and c= vernier caliper (Cescorf Equipamentos para Esportes, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil)
Preinformed written consents were obtained from each respondent, and we have also assured them that their anonymity would be preserved during and after the present study. Ethical clearance for the performance of the present study was taken from the institutional ethical and review board. Participation in the present study was voluntary and the purpose of the study was explained to the participants prior to the distribution of the questionnaires. Permission from the Office of the Dharan municipality was also obtained.
Questions regarding the hand preferences of the participants in: 1) writing; 2) drawing; 3) throwing balls; 4) using scissors; 5) using toothbrush; 6) knife without fork; 7) using a spoon 8); using a broom 9); striking matches; and 10) opening boxes were asked to the subjects by providing the questionnaire. Subjects had to put a “ + ” in the column associated with the hand that they was used to carry out each activity. They had to put a “ + +” in the associated column if their preference for one hand was very strong; and to put a “ + ” in both columns if they used both hand equally. A “ + +” in the right column was assigned 10 points, a “ + ” in the right column 5 points, a “ + +” in the left column - 10 points, and, a “ + ” in the left column - 5 points. The resultant sum of these points was used to determine the Geschwind (laterality) score, an indicator of the direction and of the degree of hand preference. The −100 ≤ Geschwind score ≤ +100 (right hand preference decreases and left hand preference is quantified by Geschwind score, value of which ranges from − 100 (strong left hand preference) to + 100 (strong right hand preference). Hand preference was evaluated in 5 groups depending on the value of the Geschwind laterality score, as shown in [Table 1 ].
Table 1
Hand preference were evaluated in 5 groups depending on the value of the Geschwind laterality score
Hand Preference[* ]
Geschwind Score[** ]
Minimum value
Maximum value
Right hand
Strong
+80
+100
Weak
+20
+75
Ambhidextrous
−15
+15
Left hand
Weak
−75
−20
Strong
−100
−80
* Hand preference was determined according to the Edinburgh Inventory, which evaluates the direction and the degree of hand preference (Oldfield Rc,1971).
** The resultant sum of these points were used to determine the Geschwind (laterality) score, an indicator of the direction and of the degree of hand preference.
The results were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). The gender differences in the 2D:4D ratios and in hand preference in each ethnic group were evaluated by an unpaired t -test. The right-left differences in 2D:4D ratios (2D:4D right hand – 2D:4D left hand) in each gender and ethnic group were evaluated by an unpaired t -test. The differences of laterality in the 2D:4D ratios, taking into account the hand preference, were evaluated by the paired student t -test. A p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The correlation between the hand preference and the 2D:4D ratios were evaluated by the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) analysis. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 11.4 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).
Results
In the present study, 82% of the TN males were found to have a strong right hand (SRH) whereas 82.5% of the TN females were found to have a SRH, followed by 10% and 12.5% strong left hand (SLH) in males and females, respectively, whereas in IN males and females, SRH were 86%, followed by 10% and 12.5% SLH in males and females, respectively ([Table 2 ]).The 2D:4D ratio of the TN subjects in both hands of both genders were found be statistically significant (p < 0.001). However, in the IN subjects of both genders, only the left side 2D:4D ratio was found be statistically significant (p < 0.001) ([Table 3 ]).The right-left difference by gender in each group were found be statistically significant (p < 0.001) ([Table 4 ]). The right-left 2D:4D ratios in the 5 groups evaluated by hand preference in the TN population were found to be not statistically significant (p > 0.05) ([Table 5 ]). The right-left 2D:4Ds ratios in SRH and SLH TN males were found be statistically significant (p < 0.001) ([Table 6 ]). The right-left 2D:4D ratios in SRH and in weak right hand (WRH) of IN subjects were found be statistically significant (p < 0.001) ([Table 7 ]). The right-left 2D:4D ratios in SRH IN males and in SRH, WRH, and SLH in IN females were found be statistically significant (p < 0.001) ([Table 8 ]). The right 2D:4D ratio in WRH (p = 0.007) and in SLH (p = 0.048) groups in males in both ethnic groups were found be statistically significant ([Table 9 ]). The right 2D:4D ratio in SRH (p < 0.001) and the right 2D:4D ratio in WRH (p = 0.011) groups in females in both ethnic groups were found be statistically significant ([Table 10 ]). A positive correlation between the Geschwind score and the 2D:4D ratio was found in both ethnic groups, but this correlation was significant only in the right 2D:4D ratio of both ethnic groups (< 0.001 level; 2-tailed) ([Table 11 ]).
Table 2
Distribution of subjects by hand preference and gender
Hand preference
TN male
n (%)
TN female
n (%)
IN Male
n (%)
IN female n (%)
Total
n (%)
Strong right hand
164 (82)
165 (82.5)
172 (86)
172 (86)
673 (84)
Weak right hand
13 (6.5)
9 (4.5)
8 (4)
2 (1)
32 (4)
Ambidextrous hand
0
1 (0.5)
0
0
1 (0.1)
Weak left hand
3 (1.5)
0
0
1 (0.5)
4 (0.5)
Strong left hand
20 (10)
25 (12.5)
20 (10)
25 (12.5)
90 (11.2)
Total
200 (25)
200 (25)
200 (25)
200 (25)
800 (100)
Abbreviations: IN, Indo-Nepalese; IND, Indigenous; TN, Tibeto-Nepalese.
Results are shown as number and percentage of frequency.
Table 3
Interpretation of 2D:4D ratio by gender, hand and ethnic group
Ethnicity
Hand
Female
Male
p -value
TN
Right
1.007 ± 0.039
1.005 ± 0.042
<0.001
Left
0.999 ± 0.040
1.003 ± 0.045
<0.001
IN
Right
1.005 ± 0.024
1.005 ± 0.044
0.686
Left
1.001 ± 0.031
1.003 ± 0.045
0.04
Abbreviations: 2D:4D, second to fourth digit ration; IN, Indo-Nepalese; TN, Tibeto-Nepalese.
Results are shown as mean ± standard deviation, with p-value .
Table 4
Right-Left difference by gender in each group
Ethnicity
Male
Female
p -value
TN
-0.0021 ± 0.044
0.0012 ± 0.053
<0.001
IN
0.0021 ± 0.036
0.0012 ± 0.029
<0.001
Abbreviations: 2D:4D, second to fourth digit ratio; IN, Indo-Nepalese;TN, Tibeto-Nepalese.
Results are shown as mean ± standard deviation, with p-value .
Table 5
Right-Left 2D:4D ratio in five groups evaluated by hand preference in Tibeto-Nepalese
Handedness
Right
Left
p -value
SRH
1.0032 ± 0.041
1.0033 ± 0.042
> 0.05
WRH
0.979 ± 0.52
0.997 ± 0.48
> 0.05
AMBH
0.984
0.857
—–
WLH
0.998 ± 0.097
0.967 ± 0.41
> 0.05
SLH
1.0049 ± 0.043
1.0047 ± 0.033
> 0.05
Abbreviations: 2D:4D, second to fourth digit ratio; AMBH, ambidextrous; SLH, strong left hand; SRH, strong right hand; WLH, weak left hand; WRH, weak right hand.
Results are shown as mean ± standard deviation, with p-value .
Table 6
Right-Left 2D:4D ratio in 5 groups evaluated by hand preference in Tibeto-Nepalese by gender
Gender
Handedness
Right
Left
p -value
Male
SRH
1.0033 ± 0.0421
1.0056 ± 0.0416
< 0.001
WRH
0.9914 ± 0.054
1.0014 ± 0.052
0.581
WLH
0.9882 ± 0.097
0.9677 ± 0.041
0.71
SLH
1.0121 ± 0.061
1.0132 ± 0.044
<0.001
Female
SRH
1.0032 ± 0.041
1.0013 ± 0.041
0.151
WRH
0.9624 ± 0.046
0.9920 ± 0.043
0.601
AMBH
0.9848
0.8571
—–
SLH
0.9992 ± 0.0228
0.9979 ± 0.0214
0.623
Abbreviations: 2D:4D, second to fourth digit ratio; AMBH, ambidextrous; SLH, strong left hand; SRH, strong right hand; WLH, weak left hand; WRH, weak right hand.
Results are shown as mean ± standard deviation, with p-value .
Table 7
Right-Left 2D:4D ratio in 5 groups evaluated by hand preference in Indo-Nepalese
Handedness
Right
Left
p -value
SRH
1.0034 ± 0.036
1.0023 ± 0.038
0.04
WRH
0.998 ± 0.023
1.027 ± 0.077
< 0.001
AMBH
0
0
—–
WLH
1.109
0.939
—–
SLH
0.9976 ± 0.031
0.998 ± 0.022
> 0.05
Abbreviations: 2D:4D, second to fourth digit ratio; AMBH, ambidextrous; SLH, strong left hand; SRH, strong right hand; WLH, weak left hand; WRH, weak right hand.
Results are shown as mean ± standard deviation, with p-value .
Table 8
Right-Left 2D:4D ratio in 5 groups evaluated by hand preference in Indo-Nepalese by gender
Gender
Handedness
Right
Left
p -value
Male
SRH
1.0069 ± 0.046
1.0034 ± 0.047
< 0.001
WRH
1.0027 ± 0.021
1.0076 ± 0.047
0.875
SLH
0.9909 ± 0.037
0.9977 ± 0.025
0.287
Female
SRH
0.9998 ± 0.023
1.0011 ± 0.028
< 0.001
WRH
0.9797 ± 0.028
1.107 ± 0.151
< 0.001
WLH
1.1093
0.9393
—–
SLH
1.002 ± 0.0255
0.999 ± 0.199
< 0.001
Abbreviations: 2D:4D, second to fourth digit ratio; SLH, strong left hand; SRH, strong right hand; WLH, weak left hand; WRH, weak right hand.
Results are shown as mean ± standard deviation, with p-value .
Table 9
Right-Left 2D:4D ratio in 5 groups evaluated by hand preference in males in both ethnic groups
Handedness
Right/Left
TN
IN
p -value
SRH
Right
1.0033 ± 0.0421
1.0069 ± 0.046
0.831
Left
1.0056 ± 0.0416
1.0034 ± 0.047
0.821
WRH
Right
0.9914 ± 0.054
1.0027 ± 0.021
0.007
Left
1.0014 ± 0.052
1.0076 ± 0.047
0.466
WLH
Right
0.9882 ± 0.097
……..
…..
Left
0.9677 ± 0.041
……..
…..
SLH
Right
1.0121 ± 0.061
0.9909 ± 0.037
0.048
Left
1.0132 ± 0.044
0.9977 ± 0.025
0.064
Abbreviations: 2D:4D, second to fourth digit ratio; IN, Indo-Nepalese; SLH, strong left hand; SRH, strong right hand; TN, Tibeto-Nepalese; WLH, weak left hand; WRH, weak right hand.
Results are shown as mean ± standard deviation, with p-value .
Table 10
Right-Left 2D:4D ratio in 5 groups evaluated by hand preference in females in both ethnic groups
Handedness
Right/Left
TN
IN
p -value
SRH
Right
1.0032 ± 0.041
0.9998 ± 0.023
< 0.001
Left
1.0013 ± 0.041
1.0011 ± 0.028
0.06
WRH
Right
0.9624 ± 0.046
0.9797 ± 0.028
0.282
AMBHI
Left
Right
Left
0.9920 ± 0.043
0.9848
0.8571
1.107 ± 0.151
………
……….
0.011
…….
……..
WLH
Right
……….
1.1093
…..
Left
………
0.9393
…..
SLH
Right
0.9992 ± 0.0228
1.002 ± 0.0255
0.373
Left
0.9979 ± 0.0214
0.999 ± 0.199
0.972
Abbreviations: 2D:4D, second to fourth digit ratio; IN, Indo-Nepalese; SLH, strong left hand; SRH, strong right hand; TN, Tibeto-Nepalese; WLH, weak left hand; WRH, weak right hand.
Results are shown as mean ± standard deviation, with p-value .
Table 11
Relationship between G- score and 2D:4D ratio
Ethnic group
2D:4D ratio
Coefficent of correlation#
TN
Right
0.573**
Left
0.093 (NS)
IN
Right
0.348**
Left
0.084 (NS)
Abbreviations: 2D:4D, second to fourth digit ratio; IN, Indo-Nepalese; NS, Not significant; TN, Tibeto-Nepalese.
#Correlation is significant at a level < 0.001 (2-tailed).
Discussion
The differences in hand preferences may be linked to the prenatal production of testosterone and estradiol and, in the case of testosterone, to interactions with the homeobox genes Hoxa and Hoxd , which control the differentiation of the urogenital system and the development of the digits.[12 ] It is generally agreed in previous studies that 2D: 4D ratios tend to be greater in females (closer to 1.0), and that gender differences tend to be larger for the right hand than for the left. However, in the present study, only IN females had a greater ratio than males.[13 ]
[14 ] [Table 12 ] shows the comparative evaluation of the 2D:4D ratios between the present study and previous studies.
Table 12
Comparative evaluation of 2D:4D ratios in males and in females in different studies
Author
Population
n
Gender
2D:4D
Manning et al (1998)[10 ]
English
400
M
F
0.98
1.00
William et al (2000)[15 ]
American
108
146
M
F
0.96
0.97
Swami et al (2013)[16 ]
Harayani Brahmins
Kashmiris pandits
150
150
M
F
M
F
0.95
0.98
0.99
1.001
Present study
Tibeto-Nepalese
Indo-Nepalese
200
200
M
F
M
F
1.004
0.99
1.003
1.004
Abbreviations: 2D:4D, second to fourth digit ratio; F, female; M, male.
Conclusion
In the present study, 82% of TN males were found to be SRH, whereas 82.5% of TN females were found be SRH, followed, by 10% and 12.5% SLH in males and females, respectively. The 2D:4D ratio showed significant ethnic and population differences.