Anthropometric study using craniofacial features to determine gender in Lucknow population


Ankita Singh
Gadiputi Sreedhar
Jiji George
Abhilasha Shukla
Vaibhav Vashishta
MPS S Negi


Background: Gender is one of the main characteristics analyzed for positive human identification in forensic medicine. The methods involving physical anthropology present high rate of accuracy for human identification and gender estimation. Aim: This study aimed to determine gender through different craniofacial variables using physical anthropometric methods. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 100 individuals (50 males and 50 females) in Lucknow. Variables studied through physical anthropometry in both the genders were facial height, nasion-to-menton distance, interzygomatic arch width, and intercanthal width using a digital sliding caliper. All the measurements were taken twice. The final value was the average of the two obtained values. Results: Comparing the mean craniofacial features between two genders, t-test revealed significantly higher facial height, pronasale-to-menton distance, and interzygomatic width in males as compared to females, but the mean intercanthal width was found to be the same. Pearson's correlation analysis revealed a positive correlation between facial height and pronasale-to-menton distance, facial height and interzygomatic width, pronasale-to-menton distance and interzygomatic width, and interzygomatic width and intercanthal width. Conclusion: The craniofacial features may serve as diagnostic markers for gender identification and can be used interchangeably.


How to Cite
Ankita Singh, Gadiputi Sreedhar, Jiji George, Abhilasha Shukla, Vaibhav Vashishta, & MPS S Negi. (2017). Anthropometric study using craniofacial features to determine gender in Lucknow population. Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences, 9(3), 120–124.


  1. Croce D, Croce‑Junior D. Legal Medicine Manual. 5th ed. Sao Paulo: Saraiva; 2004.
  2. Arbenz GO. Legal Medicine and Forensic Anthropology. 1st ed. Rio de Janeiro: Atheneu; 1988.
  3. Cattaneo C. Forensic anthropology: Developments of a classical discipline in the new millennium. Forensic Sci Int 2007;165:185‑93.
  4. Carvalho SP, Brito LM, Paiva LA, Bicudo LA, Crosato EM, Oliveira RN, et al. Validation of a physical anthropology methodology using mandibles for gender estimation in a Brazilian population. J Appl Oral Sci 2013;21:358‑62.
  5. Orish CN, Didia BC, Fawehinmi HB. Sex determination using Inion‑Opistocranium‑Asterion (IOA) triangle in Nigerians’ skulls. Anat Res Int 2014;2014:747239.
  6. Vidya CS, Prashantha B, Gangadhar AR. Anthropometric predictors for sexual dimorphism of skulls of South Indian origin. Int J Sci Res Publ 2012;2:1‑4.
  7. Akinbami BO, Mark Ikpeama M. Analysis of facial height between prepubertal and post pubertal subjects in River State, Nigeria. J Anthropol Volume 2013, Article ID 308212, 5pages.
  8. Bazmi BA, Zahir S. A cross‑sectional study of soft tissue facial morphometry in children of West Bengal. Contemp Clin Dent 2013;4:42‑7.
  9. Joy O, Ahmed E, Gabrial O, Ezon‑Ebidor E. Anthropometric study of the facial and nasal length of adult Igbo ethnic group in Nigeria. Internet J Biol Anthropol 2009;2:1‑6.
  10. Anibor E, Okumagba MT, Onodarho E. The facial and nasal height of the Ijaw ethnic group in Delta state of Nigeria. Adv Appl Sci Res 2013;4:1‑5.
  11. Kasaab NH. Estimation of different facial landmarks as a guide in intercanine distance determination (Clinical Study). Al Rafidain Dent J 2013;2:305‑8.
  12. Agarwal J, Yogesh AS, Shukla CK, Banerjee C, Chandrakar AK. Orbitofacial anthropometric assessment of intercanthal and outercanthal distance measurement in Chhattisgarh region. Biomed Res 2013;24:365‑9.
  13. Oladipo GS, Fawehinmi HB, Okoh PD. Canthal indices of Urhobo and Itsekiri ethnic group. Aust J Basic Appl Sci 2009;3:3093‑6.
  14. Fledelius HC, Stubgaard M. Changes in eye position during growth and adult life as based on exophthalmometry, interpupillary distance, and orbital distance measurements. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1986;64:481‑6.
  15. Pryor HB. Objective measurement of interpupillary distance. Pediatrics 1969;44:973‑7.