• Users Online: 190
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 112-118

Nasal biometrics and nasofacial proportion in Hausas and Yorubas using Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm


Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Kwara, NIgeria

Date of Web Publication29-Feb-2016

Correspondence Address:
Akinlolu Abdulazeez Adelaja
Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Kwara
NIgeria
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2348-3334.177640

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Background: Nasal biometrics is vital to facial analyses. This study evaluated nasal biometrics in Hausas and Yorubas of Nigeria. Materials and Methods: Hausas (150 males and 150 females, aged 18-36 years) and Yorubas (150 males and 150 females, aged 15-33 years) were selected as subjects with informed consents and when established as Hausas or Yorubas by parents and grandparents. Height, body weight and cephalometric parameters (evaluated on three-dimensional facial photographs) were measured on subjects. The novel Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm was developed using modified row method of computer programming. Nasal root width, nose height, nose width, nasal bridge length, nasal tip protrusion, nasal index, facial width and nasofacial proportion computed from readings of Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm were analyzed using Z-test (P ≤ 0.05) of 2010 Microsoft Excel statistical software. Results: Computed nasal biometrics showed statistically nonsignificant higher values (P > 0.05) in males of Hausas (100%) and Yorubas (80%) compared to their female counterparts. In addition, results showed nonsignificant higher values (P > 0.05) in 80% of nasal biometrics in Hausas compared to Yorubas in both sexes. Based on classifications of nose types from nasal index, Hausas have the platyrrhine nose type while Yorubas have the mesorrhine nose type. Nasofacial proportion was lower in Hausa males compared to females, but of same values in Yoruba males and females. In addition, nasofacial proportions were lower in Hausas compared to Yorubas in both sexes. Conclusions: Sexual dimorphism of nasal biometrics exists between sexes of Hausas and Yorubas. Furthermore, Hausas and Yorubas are of similar nasal sizes.

Keywords: Biometrics, image-processing algorithm, nasofacial proportion, nose


How to cite this article:
Adelaja AA. Nasal biometrics and nasofacial proportion in Hausas and Yorubas using Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm. CHRISMED J Health Res 2016;3:112-8

How to cite this URL:
Adelaja AA. Nasal biometrics and nasofacial proportion in Hausas and Yorubas using Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm. CHRISMED J Health Res [serial online] 2016 [cited 2019 Oct 14];3:112-8. Available from: http://www.cjhr.org/text.asp?2016/3/2/112/177640


  Introduction Top


The nose is a characteristic component of the face, which is the best feature that distinguishes an individual.[1] Nasal shapes and biometrics are, therefore, vital to forensic analyses, facial reconstructions, examinations of sexual differences and biological variability amongst ethnic groups. Nigeria is the most populous black nation in the world, and the Hausas, Igbos and Yorubas constitute about sixty percent of her population.[2],[3] The researcher is not aware of any previous three-dimensional (3D) morphometric study of the nose in Hausas and Yorubas. This study aims to compute biometric measurements of the nose in Hausas and Yorubas from readings of a novel image-processing algorithm.


  Materials and Methods Top


Pilot study

A pilot study was conducted to determine the reliability of the novel Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm using forty Yoruba subjects (Twenty males and Twenty females), aged 18–23 years, who were undergraduate students of Osun State School of Health Technology, Ilesa and Osun State University, Okuku Campus. Informed consents of subjects were obtained in accordance with ethical guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Facial parameters evaluated from readings of the algorithm on 3D facial photographs were converted to life sizes and the results were statistically compared with measurements of same facial parameters computed from readings of the Vernier Caliper (1D anthropometry), using t-test of the Statistical Package for the Social Science software Statistics 23, developed by the International Business Machines Corporation (IBM).

Pairwise comparative statistical analyses of computed mean values of cephalometric parameters (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) in millimeters between Vernier Caliper (1D anthropometry) and Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm (3D anthropometry) measurements in male and female control subjects showed lower or higher values, but no significant differences (PB> 0.05) in 100% of measured parameters: Total face height, long forehead height, upper face height, morphological face height, nose height, and lower face height [Figure 1]. The Bonferroni correction (PB) method was employed to reduce the chances of obtaining false-positive results (Type I errors) declaring wrong significant difference when no significant difference exists.[4],[5],[6]
Figure 1: Biometric measurements of the Face. tr = trichion, n = nasion, sn = subnasale, and gn = gnathion. TFH = total face height, FH = forehead height, UFH = upper face height, NH = nose height, MFH = morphological face height, and LFH = lower face height

Click here to view


Selection of subjects and determination of sample size

Letters of approval for conduct of the study were received from managements of Kebbi State University of Science and Technology, Aliero; Adamu Augie College of Education, Argungu; School of Health Technology, Jega and Kebbi State School of Nursing and Midwifery, Birnin Kebbi, from where Hausa subjects (150 males and 150 females, aged 18–36 years) were locally selected; and Osun State University, Okuku Campus from where Yoruba subjects (150 males and 150 females, aged 15–33 years) were locally selected for the study using the purposive technique or judgment sampling method,[7],[8],[9],[10],[11] only when established via distributed questionnaires as Hausa or Yorubas by parents and grandparents. Informed consents were obtained from selected subjects in accordance with ethical guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.

Data collection and evaluated facial cephalometric parameters

Data on height and bodyweight, parents and grandparents ethnic origin, local government area, state of origin, and facial photographs were obtained from each subject. Photographs of subjects were taken with 3D SONY cyber-shot DSC-HX7V camera (Sony Electronics Incorporated, San Diego, USA) using modified procedures for standardized photography.[12] Cephalometric or biometric measurements of the mouth (in millimeters) were computed from readings of the Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm on facial photographs of each subject. Measured height (meters) in Hausas ranged from 1.6 to 1.9 in males and 1.3–1.8 in females while the range of bodyweight in kilograms was 45–85 in males and 43–70 in females. Measured height (meters) in Yorubas ranged from 1.5 to 1.8 in males and 1.2–1.7 in females while the range of bodyweight in kilograms was 46–80 in males and 45–72 in females.

Width of the nasal root (maxillofrontale-maxillofrontale), nose height or nose length (nasion-subnasale), nose width (alare-alare), nasal bridge length (nasion-pronasale), nasal tip protrusion (subnasale-pronasale), nasal index (nose width divided by nose height × 100), facial width (zygion-zygion), and nasofacial proportion (nose width to facial width ratio) were evaluated in this study [Figure 2] and [Figure 3].
Figure 2: Biometric measurements of the nose. (a) Width of the nasal root: (mf - mf) (b) nose height: (n - sn) (c) nose width: (al - al) (d) nasal bridge length: (n - prn) (e) nasal tip protrusion: (sn - prn). mf = maxillofrontale, n = nasion, al = alare, prn = pronasale, and sn = subnasale

Click here to view
Figure 3: Nasofacial proportion. (a) Facial width: (zy - zy) (b) nose width: (al - al) (c) nasofacial proportion: Nose width/facial width zy = zygion and al = alare

Click here to view


Development of the Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm for face recognition.

Digital image processing uses computer algorithms to process images for recognition by an electronic or computer medium.[13],[14],[15] It uses input data generated from images to produce deciding features that represent the scenes in the image.[13],[14],[15] The Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm for forensic face recognition was developed using the modified computer programing principle of row method.[14],[15],[16] In the row method, each picture element (pixel) given by a number or three-set of numbers called gray scale depending on the color and texture of the image portion being represented was considered column by column along a row until all the rows were covered. The gray scale of each cell was confirmed to represent the color of the marked points previously set as the threshold gray scale. The coordinates of any detected point were noted and recorded.[14],[15],[16] Since some of the detected points were not at same horizontal or vertical levels, the Pythagoras theorem was used to calculate the pixel distance before converting to actual distance using the pixels of the reference points and their computed distances as read by the image-processing algorithm.[14],[15],[16]

Statistical analyses

Data collected from biometric measurements of the nose and calculations of proportions were statistically analyzed using the 2010 Microsoft Excel Statistical software of personal computer manufactured by TOSHIBA Incorporations. The two sample Z-test method (used when the sample size is >30) was employed for statistical significance pairwise comparisons of computed means of biometric measurements of the nose by sex and tribe. The alpha value for test of significance was set at P ≤ 0.05.


  Results Top


Biometric measurements of the nose by sex

Statistical analyses of measurements of the nose (Mean ± SD in millimeters) in Hausas showed nonsignificant higher mean values (P > 0.05) in 100% of measured parameters: Width of nasal root, nasal bridge length, nasal tip protrusion, nose height, and nose width in males compared to females. The nasal index was higher in Hausa males than in females [Table 1].
Table 1: Nasal biometrics (mean±standard deviation in mL) by sex

Click here to view


However, statistical analyses of measurements of the nose (mean ± SD in millimeters) showed nonsignificant lower mean values (P > 0.05) in 20% of parameters: Nasal tip protrusion, but nonsignificant higher mean values (P > 0.05) in 80% of parameters: Width of nasal root, nasal bridge length, nose height, and nose width in Yoruba males compared to females. The nasal index was lower in Yoruba males than in females [Table 1].

Biometric measurements of the nose by tribe

Statistical analyses of measurements of the nose (Mean ± SD in millimeters) showed nonsignificant higher mean values (P > 0.05) in 20% of parameters: Width of nasal root, but nonsignificant lower mean values (P > 0.05) in 80% of parameters: Nasal bridge length, nasal tip protrusion, nose height, and nose width in Hausa males compared to Yoruba males. The nasal index was lower in Hausa males than in Yoruba males [Table 2].
Table 2: Nasal biometrics (mean±standard deviation in mL) by tribe

Click here to view


Similarly, statistical analyses of measurements of the nose (Mean ± SD in millimeters) showed nonsignificant higher mean values (P > 0.05) in 20% of parameters: Width of nasal root, but nonsignificant lower mean values (P > 0.05) in 80% of parameters: Nasal bridge length, nasal tip protrusion, nose height, and nose width in Hausa females compared to Yoruba females. The nasal index was lower in Hausa females than in Yoruba females [Table 2].

Nasofacial proportions by sex and tribe

Comparative nasofacial proportion showed lower value in Hausa males compared with females, but same values in Yoruba males and females [Table 3]. Furthermore, nasofacial proportions showed lower values in Hausa males when compared to Yoruba males. Similarly, the lower nasofacial proportion was observed in Hausa females compared to Yoruba females [Table 3].
Table 3: Nasofacial proportions by sex and tribe

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


Anthropometry as an anthropological technique is of great importance to forensic anthropology, an aspect of forensic science that deals with the establishment of human identity.[17] 1D anthropometry reads distances between soft-tissue landmarks using calipers or measuring tapes.[7],[9],[18] The demerits of 1D anthropometry include excessive time consumption, possible distortion of soft tissue by its equipment which may introduce errors, errors of identifications and readings of anthropometric distances between operators, and limited shape information.[7],[18] Digital anthropometry could be 2D or 3D and are employed in face recognition systems for computing biometric parameters.

The face recognition system (2D or 3D) employs computerized algorithms for face recognition and is the most widely used method of identification or authentication of identity in civil and criminal investigations for forensic analyses and face detection purposes.[19],[20] 2D facial recognition system uses 2D or photoanthropometry with measurements read on 2D images and is limited by physical appearance changes, changes in lighting intensity, aging, pose, and the inability to provide structural information of surface curvature and geodesic distances about the face.[19],[20],[21]

The 3D facial recognition system, in contrast, provides more accurate data, faster data speed acquisition, complete and real information of shapes, texture and color, and allows representation of shapes or landmarks by set coordinates.[19],[20],[21],[22] It shows a high level of accuracy and reliability and is more robust to face variations due to different factors. Its pose can easily be corrected by rigid rotations in 3D space. Its algorithm is compatible with variations in illumination conditions during image acquisition [19],[20] and is applicable to both the 2D and 3D face recognition systems. 3D facial recognition system uses 3D digital image technology devices such as surveillance videos, cameras, and scanners with 3D anthropometry for computing biometric parameters.[22],[23] Hence, 3D anthropometry has potentials in growth assessment studies, quantification of facial morphology, assessment of facial deformity, clinical analyses, anaplastology, genotypic-phenotypic studies of syndromes, and forensic investigations.[22],[23],[24]

Results of biometric measurements of the nose (Mean ± SD in millimeters) showed statistically nonsignificant higher mean values (P > 0.05) of measured parameters in Hausa (100%) and Yoruba (80%) males compared to females [Table 1]. The results implied sexual dimorphism with higher mean values in males compared to females in Hausas and Yorubas.

Comparative analyses of biometric measurements of the nose (Mean ± SD in millimeters) showed statistically nonsignificant higher mean values (P > 0.05) in 80% of parameters in Hausas compared to Yorubas in both sexes. Similarly, computed nasal indices were lower in Hausas than in Yorubas in both sexes [Table 2]. The results of biometric measurements of the nose in Hausas and Yorubas showed higher mean values in Yorubas in most parameters, but no significant differences between the two ethnic groups, which implied that Hausas and Yorubas are of similar nasal measurements.

The results of calculated nasal indices showed higher values in Hausas (85 in males and 91.2 in females) than in Yorubas (84 in males and 82.1 in females). This is in disagreement with observations of previous studies which noted higher nasal index of 94 in Yorubas when compared to the nasal index of 90 in Hausas of Kano, Kano State of Nigeria, aged 13–30 years,[25] and higher nasal indices in Yorubas (100 in males and 94.1 in females) than in Hausas (71 in males and 67.2 in females), aged 17-25 years, resident in Kano, Kano State of Nigeria.[26]

Analyses of mean values in millimeters of width of nasal root showed lower values in males of Hausas: 18 and Yorubas: 17 when compared to those of previous 1D anthropometric studies in Chinese: 18.3, aged 18–66 years,[27] African American: 27, aged 18–30 years,[28] and North American whites: 19.6 males.[28] Comparisons of mean values in millimeters of width of nasal root showed lower mean values in females of Hausas: 15 and Yorubas: 14 when compared to those of previous 1D anthropometric studies in Chinese: 17.3, aged 18–66 years,[27] Korean Americans: 21.1, aged 18–35 years,[29] and North American whites: 18.4 females.[29]

Comparative analyses of mean values in millimeters of nasal bridge length showed lower values in males of Hausas: 32 and Yorubas: 36 when compared to those of previous 1D anthropometric studies in males of African Americans: 45.4, aged 18- 30 years [28] and North American Whites: 50.[28] Computed nasal bridge length values in females from other ethnic groups could not be obtained for comparative analyses with those of Hausas and Yorubas examined in the present study.

The nasal index is evaluated as the percentage ratio of the nose width to the nose height.[30],[31] The nose is classified, based on the nasal index (NI) as leptorrhine or long narrow nose (NI less than or equal to 69.90), mesorrhine or medium nose (NI of 70.0-84.90) and platyrrhine or broad nose (NI greater than or equal to 85.0).[30],[31] The leptorrhine nose type is characteristic of Caucasians while the mesorrhine and platyrrhine nose types are associated with Caucasoids of Indo-Aryan ancestry and Blacks.[31] The computed nasal indices in the present study implied that Hausas (NI: 85 in males and 91.2 in females) have the platyrrhine nose type while the Yorubas (NI: 84 in males and 82.1 in females) have the mesorrhine nose type.

The platyrrhine nose type in Hausas of the present study is in disagreement with previous 1D studies which reported the mesorrhine nose type in Hausa males (NI: 71) and the leptorrhine nose type in Hausa females (NI: 67.2), aged 17-25 years, in Kano, Kano State of Nigeria.[26] The platyrhhine nose type in Hausas of the present study is, however, in agreement with previous 1D studies which reported platyrrhine nose type of Benins (NI: 97.65 in males and 96.99 in females), aged 21-25 years, of Edo State,[32] Igbos (NI: 95.8 in males and 90.8 in females), aged 18-30 years, resident in Delta and Imo States [33] of Nigeria, and Angolan males (NI: 93), aged 18-30 years.[34]

The mesorrhine nose type observed in Yorubas of the present study is in disagreement with previous 1D studies which reported the platyrrhine nose type in Yorubas (NI: 90.0 in males and 88.1 in females) resident in Osun and Oyo States, aged 18-30 years [33] and Yorubas resident in Kano State (NI: 100 in males and 94.1 in females)[26] of Nigeria. However, the mesorrhine nose type in Yorubas of the present study is in agreement with previous 1D studies which reported mesorrhine nose type in Andonis (NI: 79.83 in males and 83.77 in females)[35] and Ikwerre males (NI: 84.81) of River State, Nigeria,[30] Angolan females (NI: 74.2)[34] and African Americans (NI: 83.2 in males and 79.2 in females).[34] In addition, the mesorrhine nose type in Yorubas of the present study is in agreement with previous 1D studies which reported mesorrhine nose type in Arabs (NI: 74.48), Indians (NI: 72.4) and Singaporeans (NI: 72.4).[31]

However, the platyrrhine nose type in Hausas and the mesorrhine nose type in Yorubas observed in the present study expectedly disagreed with previous 1D studies which reported leptorrhine nose type in Serbians: (NI: 67.56 in males and 66.01 in females),[31] North American Whites (NI: 65.5 in males and 64.2 in females),[34] Armenians (NI: 63.8) and Turkish citizens (NI: 61.45).[31] This observation could possibly be due to ethnic variations between Blacks and Caucasians. The reported leptorrhine nose type in Hausa females [26] could have been as a result of errors of identifications of soft-tissue landmarks and readings of anthropometric distances in 1D studies.[36] Such errors of measurements are not obtainable in 3D anthropometry which represents soft-tissue landmarks with set co-ordinates and provides more accurate data. The observed mesorrhine nose type in Yorubas and the platyrrhine nose types in Hausas in the present study as expected of nose classifications of Blacks, further confirm that the novel image-processing algorithm developed can be used to compute cephalometric measurements.

Comparative nasofacial proportion showed lower value in Hausa males compared to females, but same values in Yoruba males and females. In addition, evaluated nasofacial proportions showed lower values in Hausas compared to Yorubas in both sexes [Table 3]. The results of nasofacial proportions (nose width to facial width ratio) implied that the nose width occupied <40% of the facial width in Hausas (35% in males and 36% in females) and Yorubas (37% in males and 37% in females). These findings are in agreement with the observations of a previous study, which reported that the nose width occupied <40% of the facial width in African American women, aged 18–30 years.[36]


  Conclusions Top


From analyses of data and interpretations of results of biometric measurements of the nose and nasofacial proportions computed from readings of the Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm in Hausas of Kebbi State and Yorubas of Osun State of Nigeria, the following conclusions were drawn:

  • Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm can be employed for computing measurements on 2D and 3D images for anthropometric, forensic, and clinical analyses. Furthermore, data computed from its readings can be converted to actual or life sizes as obtained in 1D measurements
  • Sexual dimorphism exists between males and females of Hausas and Yorubas, though they are of statistically nonsignificant different nasal biometrics
  • Hausas and Yorubas are of similar biometric measurements of the nose.


Acknowledgment

I acknowledge the following:

  • The professional contribution of Professor Raji, Abdulganiy Olayinka, a computer programing expert of the Department of Agricultural and Environmental Engineering of the Faculty of Technology, University of Ibadan, Ibadan to the development of the Akinlolu-Raji image-processing algorithm employed for computation of facial cephalometric parameters in this study
  • The approval for the conduct of the study and supports of the students, staff members and managements of Osun State School of Health Technology, Ilesa, Osun State; Osun State University, Osogbo, Osun State; Kebbi State University of Science and Technology, Aliero, Kebbi State; Adamu Augie College of Education, Argungu, Kebbi State, Kebbi State School of Nursing and Midwifery, Birnin Kebbi, Kebbi State and the School of Health Technology, Jega, Kebbi State of Nigeria from where the subjects for the pilot study and the main study were selected
  • The approval for the conduct of the study and support of the management of the University of Ilorin, Ilorin for granting me Staff Development Award, Professor C. N. B. Tagoe and Dr. M. S. Ajao.


Declaration of patient consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/ their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Moore KL, Persaud TV. The Developing Human (Clinically Oriented Embryology). 7th ed. USA: Elsevier; 2003.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Salawu B. Ethno-religious conflicts in Nigeria: Causal analysis and proposals for new management strategies. Eur J Soc Sci 2010;13:345-53.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Fawole OA, Bello ML. The impact of ethno-religious conflict on Nigerian federalism. Int NGO J 2011;6:211-8.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Wright PS. Adjusted P values for simultaneous inference. Biometrics 1992;48:1005-13.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
David RA, Dennis JS, Thomas AW. Modern Business Statistics with Microsoft Excel. 5th ed. USA: Cengage Learning; 2015. p. 574.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
International Business Machines Corporation. The calculation of Bonferroni-adjusted P values; 2015. Available from: http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21476685. [Last accessed on 2015 Aug 03].  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Farkas LG. Anthropometry of the head and face. 2nd ed. Baltimore, USA: Williams and Wilkins, Raven Press, Lippincott; 1994. p. 3-56.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Ted P. Purposive sampling. In: Lisa MG, editor. The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Vol. 1, 2. Thousand Oaks, California, USA: Sage Publications Incorporated; 2008. p. 697-8.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Akinlolu AA, Akinola BO, Hussein AT. Position of the ear in relation to facial midline landmarks in Nigerians. Internet J Human Anat 2010;2:1-7. Available from: http://ispub.com/IJHA/2/1/10497. [Last accessed on 2015 Aug 03].  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Memon S, Fida M, Shaikh A. Comparison of different craniofacial patterns with pharyngeal widths. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2012;22:302-6.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Bacchetti P, Deeks SG, McCune JM. Breaking free of sample size dogma to perform innovative translational research. Sci Transl Med 2011;3:87ps24.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Akinlolu AA. Ear and facial biometrics of hausas and yorubas using a novel image-processing algorithm for forensic face recognition. Ilorin, Nigeria: Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ilorin; 2016.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Pratt WK. Digital image processing: PIKS inside. 3rd ed. John Wiley and Sons, United Kingdom; 2001.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Raji AO. Discrete element modeling of the deformation of bulk agricultural particulates. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne; 1999. Available from: https://www.theses.ncl.ac.uk/dspace/bitstream/10443/871/1/Raji99.pdf. [Last accessed on 2015 Aug 03].  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Raji AO, Fagboun AA, Dania MK. An approach to detecting defects in food products. Proceedings of the First International Conference and 22nd Annual Conference of the Nigerian Society of Agricultural Engineers, Ibadan, Nigeria; 2000. p. 36-9.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Ewemoje TA, Raji AO. Evaluation of the leaf area index of cowpea using empirical and image processing methods (Vigna unguiculata). J Eng Res 2011;16:42-52.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Kosa F. Application and role of anthropological research in the practice of forensic medicine. Acta Biol Szeged 2000;44:179-88.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Sforza C, de Menezes M. Three – Dimensional face morphometry. Dental Press J Orthod 2010;15:13-5.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Kukula EP, Elliott SJ, Waupotitsch R, Pesenti B. Effects of illumination changes on the performance of geometric face vision. 38th annual international Carnahan conference. Security Technology 2004;331-337. Available from: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/4130198_Effects_of_illumination_changes_on_the_performance_of_Geometrix_FaceVision_3D_FRS. [Last accessed on 2015 Aug 03].  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Gupta S, Mia KM, Alan CB. Anthropometric 3-D face recognition. Int J Comput Vision 2010;90:331-49.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Moreton R, Morley J. Investigation into the use of photoanthropometry in facial image comparison. Forensic Sci Int 2011;212:231-7.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Ghoddousi H, Edler R, Haers P, Wertheim D, Greenhill D. Comparison of three methods of facial measurement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;36:250-8.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Jayaratne YS, Zwahlen RA. Application of digital anthropometry for craniofacial assessment. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2014;7:101-7.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Oghenemavwe EL, Fawehinmi BH, Daenwin TL. A software tool for facial analysis. Research J Appl Sci Eng and Tech 2012;4:551-6.   Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Umar MB, Ojo AS, Asalwa SA, Hambolu JO. Comparison of cephalometric indices between the Hausa and Yoruba ethnic groups of Nigeria. Res J Med Sci 2011;5:83-9.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Anas IY, Saleh MS. Anthropometric comparison of nasal indices between Hausa and Yoruba Ethnic groups in Nigeria. J Sci Res d Rep 2014;3:437-44.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Du L, Zhuang Z, Guan H, Xing J, Tang X, Wang L, et al. Head-and-face anthropometric survey of Chinese workers. Ann Occup Hyg 2008;52:773-82.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Porter JP. The average African American male face: An anthropometric analysis. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2004;6:78-81.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Choe KS, Sclafani AP, Litner JA, Yu GP, Romo T 3rd. The Korean American woman's face: Anthropometric measurements and quantitative analysis of facial aesthetics. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2004;6:244-52.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Oladipo GS, Oyakhire, MO, Henry AAU. Anthropometric studies of nasal indices of the Ekpeye and Ikwerre ethnic groups in Nigeria. Asian J Med Sci 2010;2:167-9.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Jovanović J, Jeremić D, Jovanović B, Vulović M, Sazdanović P, Sazdanović M, et al. Nasal morphological characteristics of the Serbian population. Arch Biol Sci Belgrade 2014;66:227-32.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Omotoso DR, Oludiran OO, Sakpa CL. Nasofacial anthropometry of adult Bini tribe in Nigeria. African J Biomed Res 2011;14:219-21.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Oladipo GS, Gwunireama IU, Asawo OO. Anthropometric comparison of nasal indices between the Igbos and Yorubas in Nigeria. Global J Med Sci 2006;5:37-40.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Farkas LG, Katic MJ, Forrest CR, Alt KW, Bagic I, Baltadjiev G, et al. International anthropometric study of facial morphology in various ethnic groups/races. J Craniofacial Surg 2005;16:615-46.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Oladipo GS, Eroje MA, Fahwehinmi HB. Anthropometric comparison of nasal indices between Andoni and Okrika tribes of Rivers State, Nigeria. International J Medicine Med Sci 2009;1:135-7.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Porter PJ, Olson KL. Anthropometric facial analysis of the African American woman. Arch Facial Plastic Surg 2001;3:191-7.  Back to cited text no. 36
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]


This article has been cited by
1 Sexual dimorphism in facial soft tissue anthropometry among young adult Nigerians
Moninuola A. Ernest,Oluwatosin O. Sanu,Ifeoma L. Utomi,Michael N. Ibeabuchi
Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists. 2018; 7(3): 94
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusions
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2147    
    Printed22    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded223    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]