A systematic analysis of kinanthropometry measures among coastal region fishermen and non-fisherman children in Puducherry

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

A systematic analysis of kinanthropometry measures among coastal region fishermen and non-fisherman children in Puducherry

Sathish Kumar S. Sathish Kumar S., assistant professor Faculty of General Adapted Physical Education and Yoga Ramakrishna Mission Vivekananda Educational and Research Institute, PhD (India), Vinod Kumar G. Vinod Kumar G., professor Department of Physical Education and Sports Pondicherry University, PhD (India)

Аннотация

Систематический анализ кинантропометрических показателей среди рыбаков прибрежных районов и детей, не являющихся рыбаками, в Пудучерри

Введение: Кинантропометрия - это научный метод измерения состояния человеческого тела с целью определения точного физического состояния человека и основных различий между каждым человеком. Прибрежный регион - это место, где происходит слияние суши и моря, и, по сути, люди, живущие в этом регионе, имеют другой физический статус, чем те, кто живет в глубине материка. Целью исследования было проанализировать прибрежных мальчиков из семей рыбаков и изучить их генетические различия в антропометрических показателях. Методология: Методом целенаправленной выборки было отобрано в общей сложности 250 детей 6-го класса из семей рыбаков и 250 детей из семей, не являющихся рыбаками. Также были измерены различные антропометрические показатели, такие как размах рук, обхват головы, обхват шеи, обхват рук в расслабленном и согнутом состоянии, предплечья, запястья, грудь, талия, ягодичные мышцы, бедра и середина бедра, икры, лодыжки, и эти показатели в обеих группах были проверены с помощью независимого выборочного t-теста и результаты были получены. Вывод: Средний размах рук, обхват головы, шеи, предплечья, запястья, талии, ягодичных мышц, бедра, середины бедра, икры и лодыжки был значительно выше у прибрежных рыбаков. Среднее значение расслабленности рук, их сгибания и объема грудной клетки значительно преобладало в группе, не являющейся рыбаком. Был сделан вывод, что среди выбранных переменных группа прибрежных рыбаков является более значимо доминирующей, чем группа, не являющаяся рыбаком. Ключевые слова: Пропорции тела, антропометрия, генетика

Abstract

Introduction: Kinanthropometry is a scientific method of measuring the human body to identify the exact physical status of a person and the basic difference between every individual. The coastal region is the place where the interface of land and sea takes place and basically, people who live in this region have different physical statuses than the persons who live inland side. The study aimed to analyze the coastal boys from the fishermen family and to study their genetic differences in anthropometric measures.

Methodology: A sum of 250 children in 6^th Grade from fishermen families and 250 children from Non-fisherman families have been chosen by purposive sampling design. And various anthropometric measures like arm span, Head girth, neck girth, arm girths relaxed and flexed, Forearm, wrist, chest, waist, gluteal, Thigh and mid-thigh, calf, the ankle been measured, and those measurements of both the groups is been tested by using independent sample t-test and the results is been derived.

Conclusion: The Mean of Arm Span, Head Girths, Neck, Forearm, Wrist, Waist, Gluteal, Thigh, Mid-Thigh, Calf, and Ankle were been significantly dominated by the Coastal fisherman Group. The mean of Arm Relaxed, Arm flexed, and Chest was significantly Dominated by the Non-fisherman Group. It is been Concluded that among the variables chosen Coastal fisherman group is more significantly dominant than the Non-fisherman Group.

Keywords: Body Proportions, Anthropometry, Genetics

Introduction

Kinanthropometry is a scientific method of measuring the human body to identify the exact physical status of a person and the basic difference between every individual.The coastal region is the place where the interface of land and sea takes place and basically, people who live in this region have different physical statuses than the persons who live inland side. The fisherman is someone who engages in fishing as an occupation for their livelihood.

Objective Of The Study. The study aimed to analyze the coastal boys from the fishermen family; basically, fishermen have a very strong bodies and great vision and power to sail into the sea at various times to make their daily bread. And to study their genetic differences in anthropometric measures the study is been conducted.

Methodology. A sum of 250 children in 6^th Grade from fishermen families and 250 children from Non-fisherman families have been chosen by purposive sampling design. And various anthropometric measures like arm span, Head girth, neck girth, arm girths relaxed and flexed, Forearm, wrist, chest, waist, gluteal, Thigh and mid-thigh, calf, the ankle been measured, and those measurements of both the groups is been tested by using independent sample `t-test and the results is been derived.

Results and Discussions

1. The Computed mean values show a significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the arm span value is better for coastal fisherman boys compared with non-fisherman boys. The obtained value of t is 10.20 which is greater than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

2. The Computed mean values show a significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the head girth value is better for coastal fisherman boys compared with non-fisherman boys. The obtained value of t is 5.721 which is greater than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

3. The Computed mean values show significant differences between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the Neck girth value is better for coastal fisherman boys compared with non-fisherman boys. The obtained value of t is 6.543 which is greater than the t value of 1.96 with a df of 498.

4. The Computed mean values show a significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the Arm Relaxed value is better for coastal fisherman boys compared with non-fisherman boys. The obtained value of t is 2.687 which is greater than the t value of 1.96 with a df of 498.

5. The Computed mean values show a significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the Arm Flexed value is better for coastal fisherman boys compared with non-fisherman boys. The obtained value of t is 2.066 which is greater than the t value of 1.96 with a df of 498.

6. The Computed mean values of the forearm show no significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the obtained value of t .955 which is lesser than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

7. The Computed mean of wrist values shows no significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the obtained value of t is 1.293 which is lesser than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

8. The Computed mean of chest values shows no significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the obtained value of t is .741 which is lesser than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

9. The Computed mean of waist values shows no significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the obtained value of t is .194 which is lesser than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

10. The Computed mean values show a significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the gluteal value is better for coastal boys compared with non-fisherman boys. The obtained value of t is 2.998 which is greater than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

11. The Computed mean values show a significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the thigh value is better for coastal fisherman boys compared with non-fisherman boys. The obtained value of t is 3.275 which is greater than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

12. The Computed mean values show a significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the mid-thigh value is better for coastal fisherman boys compared with non-fisherman boys. The obtained value of t is 4.158 which is greater than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

13. The Computed mean values show a significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the Calf value is better for coastal fisherman boys compared with non-fisherman boys. The obtained value of t is 13.534 which is greater than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

14. The Computed mean values show a significant difference between the coastal fisherman & non-fisherman school boys in which the Ankle value is better for coastal fisherman boys compared with non-fisherman boys. The obtained value of t is 3.961 which is greater than the t value of 1.96 with df of 498.

Table 1

Mean, Standard Deviation, and «t» Value of Coastal Fisherman and Non-Fisherman School Boys physical condition boy fishing body

Fig. 1. Mean Value of Coastal Fisherman and Non-Fisherman Boys in 14 parameters

Conclusion

1. The Mean of Arm Span, Head Girths, Neck, Forearm, Wrist, Waist, Gluteal, Thigh, Mid-Thigh, Calf, and Ankle were been significantly dominated by the Coastal fisherman Group.

2. The mean of Arm Relaxed, Arm flexed, and Chest was significantly Dominated by the Non-fisherman Group.

3. It is been Concluded that among the variables chosen Coastal fisherman group is more significantly dominant than the Non-fisherman Group.

Recommendations:

1. Further studies can be done on various other anthropometric measures to find more significant results.

2. Children from fisherman families may be provided with professional sports training in Swimming, Boxing, Basketball, Volleyball

3. Children from Non-fisherman families may undergo some aquatic exercise to enhance their physical fitness level.

4. Future studies may conduct to find the I.Q level among these groups.

Reference

1. Vazquez G., Duval S., David R., Silventoinen K. Comparison of Body Mass Index, Waist Circumference, and Waist/Hip Ratio in Predicting Incident Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis. Epidemiologic Reviews, 2007. Vol. 29 (1), pp. 115-128.

2. Sengupta P., Sahoo S. A fitness assessment study among young fishermen of coastal areas of East Midnapore District of West Bengal, India. South East Asia Journal of Public Health. 2011. Vol. 1, pp. 28-34.

3. Nalam N. U. A comparative study of anthropometric measurements of children attending urban and rural anganwadi centres of a coastal district in Karnataka. International Journal Of Community Medicine And Public Health. 2016. Vol. 4. P. 91.

4. Deurenberg P., Yap M., Staveren W. A. Body mass index and percent body fat: a meta-analysis among different ethnic groups. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1998. Vol. 22 (12), pp. 1164-1171.

5. Chatterjee S, Das N, Chatterjee P. The estimation of the heritability of anthropometric measurements. ApplHuman Sci. 1999. Vol. 18 (1), pp. 1-7.

6. Sharma K. Genetic variance estimates and familial resemblance for body size traits. Acta Genet Med Gemellol (Roma). 1987. Vol. 36 (4), pp. 549-555.

7. Sharma K., Sharma J. C. Familial resemblance for head size in a Punjabi population of India. Annals of human biology. 1984. Vol. 11 (6), pp. 577-580.

8. Maes H. H., Neale M. C., Eaves L. J. Genetic and environmental factors in relative body weight and human adiposity. Behavior genetics, 1997. Vol. 27 (4), pp. 325-351.

9. Sharma K., Byard P. J., Russell J. M., Rao D. C. A family study of anthropometric traits in a Punjabi community: I. Introduction and familial correlations. American journal of physical anthropology, 1984. Vol. 63 (4), pp. 389-395.

10. Byard P. J., Mukherjee B. N., Bhattacharya S. K., Russell J. M., Rao D. C. Familial aggregation of blood pressure and anthropometric variables in patrilocal households. American

journal of physical anthropology, 1989. Vol. 79 (3), pp. 305-311.

11. Siegel-Tike P. Body Composition Parameters and Relationship with The Maximal Aerobic Power in Recreational Cyclists. Nutricion hospitalaria. 2015. Vol. 32 (5), pp. 2223-2227.

12. Nikolaidis P., Rosemann T., Knechtle B. Skinfold Thickness Distribution in Recreational Marathon Runners. International Journal of Environmental Research andPublic Health. 2020. Vol. 17.

13. Knechtle B, Rosemann T. Upper body skinfold thickness is related to race performance in male Ironman triathletes. Int J Sports Med. 2011. Vol. 32 (1), pp. 20-27.

14. Marfell-Jones M., Olds T., Stewart A., Carter L. International Standards for Anthropometric Assessment. The International Society for the Advancement of Kim Anthropometric (ISAK). Potchefstroom, 2006.

15. Cidras M. Body Mass Exponential Index: An Age-Independent Anthropometric Nutritional Assessment. Open Access Library Journal. 2015. Vol. 2 (9).

16. Must A., Dallal G. E., Dietz W. H. Reference Data for Obesity: 85^th and 95^th Percentiles of Body Mass Index (wt/ht2) and Triceps Skinfold Thickness. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1991. Vol. 53, pp. 839-846.

17. Garn S. M., Leonard W. R., Hawthorne V. M. Three Limitations of the Body Mass Index. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1986. Vol. 44, pp. 996-997.

18. Burton R. F. Why Is the Body Mass Index Calculated as Mass/Height2. Annals of Human Biology. 2007. Vol. 34, pp. 656-663.

19. Cidras M. Body Mass Exponential Index: An Age-Independent Anthropometric Nutritional Assessment. Open Access Library Journal, 2015. Vol. 2.

20. Pueo B. Optimal Body Composition and Anthropometric Profile of World-Class Beach Handball Players by Playing Positions. Sustainability, 2020. Vol. 12 (17), pp. 67-89.

21. Soni P., Kapoor K. Correlation of Birth Weight with other Anthropometric Parameters of Newborns in Himachal Pradesh. IJCRR. 2017. Vol 9 (15), pp. 49-54.

22. Nurashikin S. Reliability and ethical issues in conducting anthropometric research using 3D scanner technology. In The Textile Institute Book Series,WoodheadPublishing. 2022. Pp. 71-95.

Размещено на Allbest.ru