Submit manuscript...
MOJ
eISSN: 2471-139X

Anatomy & Physiology

Mini Review Volume 5 Issue 1

Cephalic index in sexual dimorphism and racial diversity: a mini review

Chinna Nneka Orish

Department of Anatomy, University of Port-Harcourt, Nigeria

Correspondence: Chinna Nneka Orish, Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Science, University of Port-Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria, Tel 23470657446312

Received: February 27, 2017 | Published: January 19, 2018

Citation: Orish CN. Cephalic index in sexual dimorphism and racial diversity: a mini review. MOJ Anat Physiol. 2018;5(1):23–26. DOI: 10.15406/mojap.2018.05.00159

Download PDF

Abstract

Craniometry and cephalometry are useful in classification of race and sex of individuals of unknown identity. This is a synoptic capture of cephalic index and cephalic dimensions in different populations. Cephalic index of females was higher than that of males in most populations with mesocephalic head shape in both sexes. Cephalic length and breadth of Indians were higher than those of Nigerians. Cephalic length and breadth were higher in male than female. Cephalic index and dimensions are important parameters in identification of both sexes and races.

Keywords: cephalic index, anthropometry, skull

Mini review

Craniometry is the scientific measurement of skulls, especially in relation to craniology while cephalometry is a branch of anthropometry in which the anatomical dimensions of head and face are measured. Cephalometry continues to be the most versatile technique in the investigation of the craniofacial skeleton because of its validity and practicality.1 Human body dimensions are affected by ecological, geographical, racial, gender, and age factors.2,3 Indices show the percentage relationship between different dimensions.4 It is an important parameter for classification of race and sex of individuals of unknown identity. Anthropometric study of head is useful in designing various head and face gadgets like helmets, head phones, goggles etc. by formulating standard sizes.5

Cranial index and cranial dimensions are invaluable tools in racial and sexual dimorphism. Cranial index is ratio of the maximum breadth of the bare skull to its maximum length multiplied by hundred.6 It is classified in to four main types namely dolichocephalic which is less than 74.9, mesocephalic with cranial index between 75 to 79.9, brachycephalic with cranial index between 80 to 84.9andhyperbrachycephalic with cranial index from 85 to 89.9.6 Maximum head length measures straight distance between glabella and opisthocranion while maximum head breadth measures maximum biparietal diameter and is the distance between the most lateral points on the parietal bones.6

In a bid to understand racial differences and sexual dimorphism among various populations metrical studies (cephalic index and cephalic dimensions) have long been studied by several researches in different populations namely Caucasians, Indians, Turkman and native Fars groups, Kosov and Albanians, Iranians Japanese, Serbs, Greek, Bulgarians, Mapuche individuals in Chile, Nigerians7,8 and all have shown clear differences in cephalic index and cephalic dimensions. This mini review is an update aimed at understanding sexual dimorphism and racial diversity employing cephalic index as a tool.

Table 1 shows different values of cephalic index in various countries and tribes. The variations or differences can be attributed to a complex interaction between genetics and environmental factors.9 Reports by several workers from different parts of the world, indicate that cephalic index of females was higher than that of males4,10‒17 though the work of18,19 reported higher cephalic index in males. Majority of head shape was observed to be Mesocephalic. Indifferent studies based in Nigerian population by Orish CN,4 Odokuma EI et al.,10 Oladipo GS18 (Nigerian Igbo) head shape of both sexes was mesocephalic which is in line with studies done in Indian population by Gujaria DIJ,14 Patro S,17 Oladipo GS,19 Bhargava I20,21 who also reported the head shape to be mesocephalic in both sexes.

Author

Year of study

Country/people

Cephalic index(M)

Cephalic index(F)

Mean cephalic index

Head shape

Bhargava & Kher21

1960

Bhils of Central India

 

76.98

Mesocephalic

Bhargava & Kher22

1961

Berelas of Central India

79.8

Mesocephalic

Shah & Jadhav24

2004

Gujarat population

 

80.81

Brachycephalic

Del Sol25

2005

9th Region of Chile

 

80.42

Brachycephalic

Oladipo & Olotu19

2006

Nigeria/Ijaw

80.98

78.24

 

M: Brachycephalic

F: Mesocephalic

Oladipo & Olotu19

2006

Nigeria/Igbo

79.04

76.83

 

Both: Mesocephalic

Golalipour et al.3

2006

Gorgan-North of Iran

 

84

Brachycephalic

Oladipo & Olotu20

2009

Nigeria/Ogoni

111.18

75.09

 

M: Hyper brachycephalic

F: Mesocephalic

Mahajan et al.26

2009

Medical students of Punjab

85.53

Hyper brachycephalic

Eroje et al.23

2010

Nigeria/ Ogbaia

 

72.96

Dolichocephalic

Odokuma11

2010

Nigeria

77.67

78.14

 

Both Mesocephalic

Ilayperuma12

2011

Srilankan

78.04

79.32

 

Both Mesocephalic

Anitha et al.13

2011

Northern India

79.14

80.74

 

M: Mesocephalic

F: Brachycephalic

Gujaria & Salvia15

2012

India/Maranthi

77.08

79.02

 

Both: Mesocephalic

Gujaria & Salvia15

2012

India/Andhra

76.28

78.16

 

Both: Mesocephalic

Gujaria & Salvia15

2012

India/Gujarati

80.42

81.2

 

Both: Brachycephalic

Yagain et al.16

2012

India

77.92

80.85

 

M: Mesocephalic

F: Brachycephalic

Kumar & Gopichand14

2013

India/Haryanvi

66.67

72.25

 

Both: Dolichocephalic

Patro et al.18

2014

India/Southern Odishia

77.28

78.38

 

Both: Mesocephalic

Orish & Ibeachu4

2016

Nigeria

76.03

76.12

 

Both: Mesocephalic

Jervas et al.17

2016

Nigeria/ Igbo)

68.8

73.6

 

Both: Dolichocephalic

Table 1 Cephalic index/head shapes in different populations

Study in Indian population by Kumar M,13 had head shape as dolichocephalic in both sexes. Similarly16,22 working in Nigerian population reported head shape as dolichocephalic. Brachycephalic head shape was reported in Gujarat population,23 Chile population,24 and Iran population3 with respect to mean cephalic index of both sexes. Brachycephalic head shape was reported in male while mesocephalic in female by Oladipo GS19 among Ijaws of Nigeria. Similarly12,15 documented mesocephalic head shape in males and brachycephalic in females among Indians.

Head shape in Punjab is hyper brachycephalic according to Mahajan A25 with respect to mean cephalic index while in Nigeria (Ogoni)18 reported that males have hyper brachycephalic while females have mesocephalic head shapes.

The cephalic length and breadth of different populations is shown in Table 2. In all, male parameters were higher than female parameters but with varying ranges of dimensions. The cephalic length and breadth of Indian population reported by various workers11,15,17,25 showed higher value than that of Nigerian study by Orish CN4 However, Nigeria cephalic dimensions do not differ much from the Southern Indian data according to the work of.13

Taken together cephalic index and dimensions tend to show sexual dimorphism and can be employed as veritable anthropometric tools in classification of races.

Authors

Year of Study

Country/People

Cephalic Length

Cephalic Breadth

Male

Female

Male

Female

Mahajan et al.25

2009

Medical students of Punjab(India)

18.58cm

17.92cm

15.68cm

14.72cm

Ilayperuma12

2011

Srilanka

180.5 ±13.22*

175 ± 6.61

147.80 ± 5.53*

141.11 ± 7.41mm

Yagain et al.16

2012

India

18.76cm

17.67cm

14.59cm

14.17cm

Kumar & Gopichand14

2013

Haryan (Northern India)

18.80 ±1.06

17.85±0.78

12.96±1.10

12.89±0.82cm

Patro et al.18

2014

India/ Southern Odishia

19.5±1.14

19.16±1.53

15.09±0.94

15±1.28cm

Orish & Ibeachu4

2016

Nigeria (Skulls)

180.4±8.12*

167.5±7.88

137.2±7.95*

127.5±3.35mm

Table 2 Cephalic dimensions in different populations

Acknowledgements

None.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kasai K, Richards LC, Brown T. Comparative study of craniofacial morphology in Japanese and Australian aboriginal populations. Hum Biol. 1993;65(5):821‒834.
  2. William P, Dyson M, Dussaak JE, et al. Gray’s Anatomy. In: Skeletal system. 38th ed. Elbs with Churchil Livingston, London, 1995. p. 607‒612.
  3. Golalipour MJ, Haidari K, Jahanshahi M, et al. The shapes of head and face in normal male newborns in South-East of Caspian Sea (Iran-Gorgan). J Anat Soc India. 2003;52(1):28‒31.
  4. Orish CN, Ibeachu PC. Craniometric indices of Nigeria skulls. Int J Anat Appl Physiol. 2016;2(1):6‒13.
  5. Singh P, Purkait R. A cephalometric study among subcaste groups Dangi and Ahirwar of Khurai Block. Anthropol. 2006;8(3):215‒217.
  6. Martin R, Saller K. Lehrbuch der Anthropologie. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer Verlag; 1957.
  7. Okupe RF, Coker OO, Gbajumo SA. Assessment of fetal biparietal diameter during normal pregnancy by ultrasound in Nigerian women. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1984;91(7):629‒632.
  8. Rexhepi A, Mika V. Cephalofacial morphological characteristics of Albania Kosova populations. Int J Morphol. 2008;26(4):935‒940.
  9. Susanne C, Sharma PD. Multivariate analysis of head measurements in Punjabi families. Ann Hum Bio. 1978;5(2):179‒183.
  10. Odokuma EI, Akpuaka FC, Igbigbi PS, et al. Patterns of cephalic indexes in three West African populations. African Journal of Biotechnology. 2010;9(11):1658‒1662.
  11. Iayperuma I. Evaluation of cephalic indices: A clue for Racial and sex diversity. Int J Morphol. 2011;29(1):112‒117.
  12. Anitha MR, Vijayanath V, Raju GM, et al. Cephalic index of North Indian population. Anatomica Karnataka. 2011;5(1):40‒43.
  13. Kumar M, Gopichand PV. The study of cephalic index in Haryanvi population. Int J Pure App Biosci. 2013;1(3):1‒6.
  14. Gujaria DIJ, Salve DVM. Comparison of cephalic index of three states of India. Int Jr Pharma Bio Sci. 2012;3(4):1022‒1031.
  15. Yagain VK, Pai SR, Kalthur SG, et al. Study of cephalic index in Indian students. Int J Morphol. 2012;30(1):125‒129.
  16. Jervas E, Anele TI, Iwuoha G, et al. Cephalic index of the Igbos, Nigeria. Anthropol Open J. 2016;1(1):23‒26.
  17. Patro S, Sahu R, Rath S. Study of cephalic index in Southern Odisha Population IOSR. J Dent Med Sci. 2014;13(1):41‒44.
  18. Oladipo GS, Olotu EJ. Anthropometric comparison of cephalic indices between the Ijaw and Igbo tribes. Global J Pure Appl Sci. 2006;12(1):137‒138.
  19. Oladipo GS, Olotu JE, Suleiman Y. Anthropometric studies of Cephalic indices of the Ogonis in Nigeria. Asian Journal of Medical Sciences. 2009;1(2):15.
  20. Bhargava I, Kher GA. An anthropometric study of Central India Bhils of Dhar district of Madhya Pradesh. J Anat Soc India. 1960;9:14‒19.
  21. Bhargava I, Kher GA. A comparative anthropometric study of Bhils and Berelas of Central India. J Anat Soc India. 1961;10:26‒33.
  22. Eroje MA, Fawehinmi HB, Jaja BN, et al. Cephalic index of Ogbia tribe of Bayesla state. Int J Morphol. 2010;28(2):389‒392.
  23. Shah GV, Jadhav HR. The study of cephalic index in students of Gujarat. J Anat Soc India. 2004;53(1):25‒26.
  24. Del Sol M. Cephalic index in a group of Mapuche individuals in the IX region of Chile. Int J Morphol. 2005;23(3):241‒246.
  25. Mahajan A, Khurana BS, Batra APS. The study of cephalic index in Punjabi students. Journal of Punjab academy of forensic medicine & toxicology. 2009;9(2):66‒70.
Creative Commons Attribution License

©2018 Orish. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and build upon your work non-commercially.