Home About Us Contact Us


Table of Content - Volume 19 Issue 3 - September 2021


Study of nasal index of population of Gujarat an anthropometric study


Uttekar Kanan G


Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, SMIMER, Surat, INDIA.

Email: kannanrahulsurve@yahoo.co.in


Abstract              Background: Anthropometric analysis in clinical practice play very important role in distinguishing various racial and ethnic feature and their preservation. Human nose differs in anatomy and morphology among racial groups. The racial and ethnic morphometric differences in nose exist in the world population. This has been the subject investigation for many scientists. The size, shape and proportion of nose are very valuable for cosmetic and plastic surgeons under taking repair and reconstruction of the nose. Soft tissue Software photo anthropometric study has been conducted with For Gujarat population. Average Nasal index for male was 80 and female was 76 with significant difference between two sex(p<0.01). Nasal index of the Gujarati male and female has been compared with other races.

Key words: Nasion, Subnasale, Alar width, Nasal Index, Reconstructive Surgery Gujarat.



It is well established fact that single standard of facial aesthetics is not appropriate for to diverse race and ethnic groups. Facial characters are largely influenced by factors such as race, ethnic groups, age, sex, culture. Facial proportions and their geometry has been subject of investigation from ancient times (Florine, Vegter et al., 2000).1 Greek canon of beauty were highly influenced by anatomic scholars since renaissance period and many of it with some modification are still embraced as the basic foundation of aesthetic facial analysis by plastic and reconstructive surgeons (Florine, Vegter et al., 2000).1 It’s a well known fact that morphological features of different race and ethnic groups does not appear randomly but are distributed in geographic cluster. Ethnicity is a variable that affects craniofacial dimension (Rajakshmi, C.H. et al. 2001).2 Nasal Index is very useful in distinguishing racial and ethnic difference Franciscus R.G. et al. 1991).3 With the development of digital technology human face and its various characters have become an identity criteria for individual. Human anthropometry is well developed branch with lot of research work going world around. nasal index is one such parameter which has been studied in the  Gujarat with diverse population has no such data. Nasal Index is an ethnic sensitive parameter by which the individuals can be classify in to various type of noses. Migration of large number of people from Gujarat to world over makes it necessary to have a base line data for plastic surgeon and reconstructive surgeon. Unknown identity of individual is also identifying using such data in various fields like forensic medicine, cybercrime and reconstructive surgery.



A total number of 760 subjects form Gujarat were studied. All subjects belong to Gujarat region with their forefather belonging to Gujarat and there is no intercaste marriage in their family. Subjects were healthy individual without any known craniofacial deformity. After the ethical clearance of institute ethical committee, the study was started. All subjects were between 18-25 years of age. Out of which 379 were males and 381 were females. Subjects were selected randomly from various a region of Gujrat. Frontal Photograph was taken in Frankfort’s plane with subjects in standing position. Photographs were taken with 10 mega pixel camera and subjected to soft tissue anthropometric software system designed in MATLAB Version 7. Photographs were analysed by one observer to prevent inter observer error. All soft tissue landmarks were reproduced on the photograph using software. The analysed data were taken on Microsoft excel file. All collected data were summarized using SPSS version 10


  1. Nasion (n) - The deepest depression at the root of the nose typically corresponds to the nasofrontal suture.
  2. Subnasale (sn) - Junction between lower borders of nasal septum and cutaneous portion of the upper lip in the midline.
  3. Alare (al) - The most lateral point on the nasal ala on right and left side.


Length of Nose- It is distance between Nasion (n) and Subnasale (sn).

Width of Nose- It is distance between Ala.

NASAL INDEX- Width of Nose / Length of Nose X 100



Gujarat population had mean nasal index of 78.0 Average Nasal index of Male was 80.0 and Female had 76.0. From above result it is obvious that Gujarati Male had higher Nasal Index than Gujarati Female. Type of Nose was Mesorrhine in both males and females. Both males and females had significant difference in their nasal index (P<0.01). Present study reviled that racial as well sexual difference in nose type and nasal index is present in male and female as well in different racial group.


Table 1: Nasal Index of Gujarat population


Average Nasal Index

Gujarati Male


Gujarati Female



Table 2: Comparison of nasal index of different population






Priyanka singh et al. (2006)




Pandey (2006)




Singh and Purkait (2006)




Singh and Purkait(2006,2008)




Oladipo et (2006)




Oladipo et(2009)



North Indian

Agarwal (2016)



Western Utter Pradesh

Sudhakar et al.




South Indian

Radha et al. (2019)




Jammu and Kashmir

Nusrat et al. (2019)





Present study





Nasal index is an request of facial triad its and internationally accepted parameter for racial origin32. Rhinoplasty and reconstructive surgery use nasal index as an important parameter in repare and reconstruction as well as medical management 34-36 Nasal index is one of the clinical anthropometric parameter recognized in nasal surgical and medical management. Nasal index of Dangi males and female was 76.5 (Priyanka, Singh. et al. 2006)4 which was lesser than Gujarati male (80.0) and female (76. 0). Nasal index of Ahirwars (Priyanka, Singh. et al. 2006)4 male was 81.0 were as for female it was 82.4 which is higher than Gujarat male (80.00 and female (76.0). These findings suggest that Gujarati female had nasal index similar to Dangi females were as in Ahirwars females it was higher.4 In a study of nasal index in jammu and Kashmir Nusrat et al.50 had found the nasal index of female was 65 and 72 for male of Kashmir with with predominant type of nose was leptorrhine () Such difference should be subjected to further investigation because of its relevance to forensic science. Nasal index of Igbo male was 95.9 and female was 90.8(Oladipo et al. 2007)5 which is higher than Gujarat population. Nasal index of Yorubas male was 90.0 and female was 88.1 (Oladipo et al. 2007)5 whereas Ijaws male show nasal index of 98.6(Oladipo et al. 2007)5 and in female nasal index was 94.2(Oladipo et al. 2007).5 All groups show higher nasal index than Gujarat population. Nasal index was found to be 73 in an study of population of Western Uttar Pradesh by Sudhakar et al. which is lower than the present study In another study on south Indian population done by Radha et al.20 nasal index of male was 67 and female was 64 with predominance of leptorrhine type of nose The nose is one of the best clues to racial origin. Nasal index is very useful anthropometric parameter in nasal surgery and medical managements (Hansen and Mygine, 2002).6 Nasal Index is related to regional and climatic difference (Farkas et al. (1986).7 Most Caucasian are Leptorrhine having long and narrow nose with nasal index of 69.9 or less.6 A successful outcome in rhinoplasty requires through and accurate preoperative planning and this can be made only possible if one has an objective in mind.


Nose is an asthetic as well as anatomical landmark in racial identification feature. face and consider as symbol of beauty and honour. Change in Nasal index is highly influence by type of race, condition of weather. The result of present study will be useful for planning of corrective and reconstructive plastic surgery of the nose. Since each racial group and ethnic population has their own nasal character and anatomical structure the mean nasal values should be correctly understood in each ethnic group to preserve race specific character since the definition of aesthetic is different in various racial groups.



  1. Florine, Vegter., Joris, J.J. Clinical anthropometry and canons of the face in historical perspective. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2000; Oct:1090-1096.
  2. Rajakshmi,C.H., Shyamo Singh.M., Bidhumukhi Devi H. Chandramani Singh. Cephalic index of Foetues of Manipuri population –A Baseline study; J.Ant.Soc.India 2001 :50(1): 8-10.
  3. Franciscus R.G.,Long ,J.C. Variation in human nasal height and breadth ;Am. J. Phys. Anthropol 1991:85(4):419-427.
  4. Priyanka, Singh. and Ruma, Purkait. A Cephalometric study among sub cast groups Dangi and Ahirwars of khurai block of Madhya Pradesh. Anthropologist 2006;Vol 8(3):215-217.
  5. Oladipo,G.S, Olabiyi,A.,O, Oremosu,A.A, Noronha, C.C. Nasal indices among major ethnic groups in southern Nigeria. Science Research and Essay 2007; Vol2(1):20-22.
  6. Hasan and Mygine,S.L. Principle of Aesthetic Nasal Surgery. Arch. Facial 2002. March-April Vol-21:289-291.
  7. Farkas,L.G., J.C. Kolar and I.R.Munro,1986. Abstract on the geography of the nose, a morphometric study. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.,10(4):191-223.
  8. R.Dayananda, Umesh Babu, J Kiran. Estimation of stature from dimensions of foot. Medico-Legal Update. 2014;14(1):6 2)
  9. Oladipo G S, Eroje M A, Fahwehinmi H B.Anthropometric comparison of nasal indices between Andoni and Okrika tribes of Rivers State Nigeria. IntJ Med Med Sci 2009;1(4):135-37. 3) Martin, R., and K. Saller(1957).
  10. Lehrbuch der anthropologie. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart Hajnis K. ,Farkas L G, Ngim RCK, Lee ST Venkatadri G. Racial and Ethnicn morphometric differences in craneiofacial coplex, In Farkas L.G. , Editor Anthro-pometry of Head and Face Newyork:1994.pp.201
  11. Oladipo G S, Olabiyi A O, Oremosu A A, Noronha C C.Nasal indices among major ethnic groups in Southern Nigeria Scientific Res Ess 2007;2(1):20-22.
  12. Farkas L G,Phillips J H,Katie M.Anthropometric anatomical and morphological nose widths in Canadian Caucasian adults. Can J Plast Surg Autumn 1998;6( 3):149- 151.
  13. Kaushal S,Patnaik V V G,Kaur P.Somatometric Analysis of Nasal Morphology in the Endogamous Groups of Punjab Hum .Bio.Rev 2013;2(1):1-11.
  14. Pandey A K. Cephalofacial variations among Onges, Anthropologist 2006; 8(4):245-49
  15. Anas I Y,Saleh M S .Anthropometric comparison of nasal indices between Hausa and Yoruba ethnic groups in Nigeria. J of Sci Res and Reports 2010;3(3):437-44.
  16. Staka G, Dragidella F, Disha M. Anthropometric study of nasal index of the Kosovo Albanian population. Antrocom Online J Anthropol 2012;8:457-62
  17. Gangrade PR, Babel H. Anthropometric study of the nasal index of the Bhil - Meena tribe of Southern Rajasthan. Int J Curr Res Rev 2012;4:88-91
  18. Hegazy AA. Anthropometric study of nasal index of Egyptians. Int J Anat Res 2014;2:761-7
  19. Jovanoviæ J, Jeremiæ D, Jovanoviæ B, Vuloviæ M, Sazdanoviæ P, Sazdanoviæ M, et al. Nasal morphological characteristics of the Serbian population. Arch Biol Sci 2014;66:227-32
  20. Radha K, Srinivasan KR et al. Nasal index: A cross sectional study among South Indian population,International journal of clinical anatomy and physiology ,2019;2;201-204
  21. Akanji et al., Comparison of Nasal Index Between Northwestern Nigeria and Northern Iranian Populations: An Anthropometric Study, journal of maxillooral surgery ;2020 Dec;19(4):596-602.
  22. tandring S, editor. Gray’s Anatomy. The Anatomical Basis of Clinical Practice. 40th ed. New York, Edinburg: Churchill and Livingstone; 2008. p. 547
  23. Vegter F, Hage JJ. Clinical anthropometry and canons of the face in historical perspective. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;106:1090-620.
  24. Rajakshmi CH, Singh MS, Devi HB. Chandramani singh L. Cephalic index of foetues of Manipuri population – A baseline study. J Anat Soc India 2001;50:8-10.
  25. Franciscus RG, Long JC. Variation in human nasal height and breadth. Am J Phys Anthropol 1991;85:419-27. 6. Hall RL, Hall DA. Geographic variation of native people along the Pacifi c Coast. Hum Biol 1995;67:407-26.
  26. Roelofse MM, Steyn M, Becker PJ. Photo identifi cation: Facial metrical and morphological features in South African males. Forensic Sci Int 2008;177:168-75.
  27. Ritz-Timme S, Gabriel P, Obertovà Z, Boguslawski M, Mayer F, Drabik A, et al. A new atlas for the evaluation of facial features: Advantages, limits, and applicability. Int J Legal Med 2011;125:301-6. 9. Porter JP, Olson KL. Analysis of the African American female nose. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;111:620-6.
  28. Aung SC, Foo CL, Lee ST. Three dimensional laser scan assessment of the Oriental nose with a new classifi cation of Oriental nasal types. Br J Plast Surg 2000;53:109-16.
  29. Zhang XT, Wang SK, Zhang W, Wang XF. Measurement and study of the nose and face and their correlations in the young adult of Han nationality. Plast Reconstr Surg 1990;85:532-6.
  30. Xu B, Wang Y, Ma J, Li M, Xu L. A computer-aid study on the craniofacial features of Archang race in Yunnan province of China. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2001;19:394-6.
  31. Canut J. Un analisis estetico dentofacial. Rev Esp Ortod 1996;26:13-3.
  32. Madison G. The passing of the great race or the racial basis of European history. Part I. Language and Nationality. Ch. 2. New York, Edinburg: Charles Scribner’s Sons; 1916. p. 1-6.
  33. Hansen B, Mygind N. How often do normal persons sneeze and blow nose? Rhinol 2002;40:10-12.
  34. Oladipio GS, Gwunireama IU, Asawa OD. Anthropometric comparison of nasal inices between the Igbos and Yorubas in Nigeria. Glob J Med 2006;5:37-40.
  35. Oladipo GS, Olabiyi AO, Oremosu AA, Noronha CC. Nasal indices among major ethnic groups in Southern Nigeria. Sci Res Essays 2007;2:20-2.
  36. Oladipo GS, Chinagorom E, Iruoghene GO. Craniofacial dimensions of Ijaw children of Nigeria. Biomed Int 2010;1:25-9.
  37. Patil GV, et al. Study on nasal index in South Indian population. Int J Curr Res 2014;6:8163-4.
  38. Risely HH. In: Crooke W, editor. The People of India. 2nd ed. New Delhi: Oriental Books Reprint Corporation; 1969. p. 395-9.
  39. Daniel B. Racial Anthropology and Genetics of the Lebanese. 2002. p. 1-2.
  40. Mulchland C. Scythic Origin of the Raiput Race. Ujjain: Rajputana Liberation Front; 2004. p. 1-2. 23. Nichani JR, Willatt DJ. Willatt DJ. Dimensional analysis–its role in our preoperative surgical planning of rhinoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2004;29:518-21.
  41. 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 Craniofac Surg 2005;16:615-46.
  42. Uzun A, Akbas H, Bilgic S, Emirzeoglu M, Bostanci O, Sahin B, et al. The average values of the nasal anthropometric measurements in 108 young Turkish males. Auris Nasus Larynx 2006;33:31-5.
  43. Oladipo G, Fawehinmi H, Suleiman Y. The study of nasal parameters (nasal height, nasal width, nasal index) amongstthe Yorubas of Nigeria. Internet J Biol Anthropol 2008;3:18-22.
  44. ladipo GS, Eroje MA, Fahwehinmi HB. Anthropometric comparison of nasal indices between Andoni and Okrika tribes of rivers state, Nigeria. Int J Med Med Sci 2009;1:135-7.
  45. Heidari Z, Mahmoudzadeh-Sagheb H, Khammar T, Khammar M. Anthropometric measurements of the external nose in 18-25-year-old Sistani and Baluch aborigine women in the southeast of Iran. Folia Morphol (Warsz) 2009;68:88-92.
  46. Eboh DE, John EA. Morphological assessment of face and nose shapes among the Ukwuanis of Delta state, Nigeria. J Exp Clin Anat 2011;10:4-8.
  47. Anibor E, Etetafi a MO, Eboh DE, Akpobasaha O. Anthropometric study of the nasal parameters of the Isokos in Delta state of Nigeria. Ann Biol Res 2011;2:408-3.
  48. Staka G, Dragidella F, Disha M. Anthropometric study of nasal index of the Kosovo Albanian population. Antrocom Online J Anthropol 2012;8:457-62.
  49. Gangrade PR, Babel H. Anthropometric study of the nasal index of the Bhil - Meena tribe of Southern Rajasthan. Int J Curr Res Rev 2012;4:88-91.






Policy for Articles with Open Access
Authors who publish with MedPulse International Journal of Anesthesiology (Print ISSN:2579-0900) (Online ISSN: 2636-4654) agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.