Kaszab Zoltán (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 77. (Budapest 1985)

Gladkova, T. D. ; Tóth, T.: Additional data to the dermatoglyphics of Hungarians

—

L_I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I U_l I I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I I l_ - 2*

2

VVVV

i

V

3

/

2

% 9 a 7 s s 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 u

5 e 7 a

a

w"f2

,9

»'

8

te

l7

i8 + Fig. 2. Group range of variability of Hungarian finger prints compared with Kazakhs (A) and Russians (B), the latters taken as zero range of variability (minimum

—maximum) of Hungarian finger and palm patterns in comparison with Kazakhs and Russians also with the mean of 26 Hungarian groups. Table 5 shows that the mean of Hungarian frequencies in most traits lies between the Kazakhs, representives of the south-Siberian anthropological type, and the Europoid Russian group. The radial loops on the fingers and the pattern on interdigital pads II are exceptions —their means are higher than in the Russians and the Kazakhs. The mean pattern frequency of interdigital pad III of Hungarians 39.88%) is also higher than in the Kazakhs (25.68%) and the Russians (28.50%). In this trait the Russians and Kazakhs are close to the minimum of Hungarians (Kazakhs slightly lower and Russian higher). The Hungarian means of the frequency of loops and whorls on the fingers and the pattern frequency on hypothenar and interdigital pad IV on the palm is close to those of the Russians. The Hungarian mean is close to that of the Kazakhs in the frequency of the thenar pattern and types 3 A and 5 A. For a better illustration of our data of Table 5 we constructed 3 graphs (Figs 2-4). In each graph the Kazakhs and Russians are taken as zero, and the negative deviations correspond of the Hungarian traits were entered on the left (—), and the positive ones on the right (+). In the centre of each figure the deviation of the Hungarian mean from those of the Kazakhs and the Russians are shown by a thick line. The deviations of the finger patterns are given in Fig. 2. The range of Hungarian groups deviated from that of the Kazakhs in the ulnar loops to the right (Fig. 2A), and in the whorls and that of the delta index to the left. In these traits the positive (+) and negative (—) deviations from the Russians are almost the same (Fig. 2B); in ulnar loops