IOSR Journal of Pharmacy and Biological Sciences (IOSR-JPBS) e-ISSN: 2278-3008. Volume 5, Issue 5 (Mar. – Apr. 2013), PP 14-17 www.iosrjournals.org www.iosrjournals.org 14 | Page Facial Aesthetic Angles of the Ibo and Yoruba Ethnic Groups of Nigeria Chisom Favor Eliakim-Ikechukwu 1* , Augustine Sylvester Ekpo 2 , Mfon Etika 3 , Churchill Ihentuge 4 , Otu Effiong Mesembe 5 . 1,2,3,5 Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria. 4 Department of Anatomy, Imo State University, Owerri, Nigeria. Abstract: Lateral facial photographs of 276 Ibo subjects (184 males and 92 females) and 201 Yoruba subjects (106 males and 95 females) were taken with a digital lens camera. The aesthetic angles were traced out from the photographs and measured. The Ibo males had mean values of 37.8 0 ±0.45 for nasofacial angle, 127.1 0 ±0.55 for nasofrontal angle, 76.1±0.89 for nasolabial angle 125.90±0.39 for nasomental angle and 88.6±0.33 for mentocervical angle. The Ibo females had mean values of 36.3 0 ±0.37 for nasofacial angle, 131.7 0 ±0.53 for nasofacial angle, 82.5±1.45 for nasolabial angle, 125.1 0 ±0.92 for nasomental angle and 87.5 0 ±0.65 for mentocervical angle. The Yoruba males had mean values of 37.3 0 ±1.76 for nasofacial angle, 127.9 0 ±0.69 for nasofrontal angle, 77.0 0 ±128 for nasolabial angle, 125.6 0 ±0.54 for nasomental angle and 85.9 0 ±0.68 for mentocervicial angle. The Yoruba females had mean values of 35.5 0 ±0.38 for nasofacial angle, 134.3 0 ±0.57 for nasofrontal angle, 84.0 0 ±1.36 0 for nasolabial angle, 126.8 0 ±0.68 for nasomental angle and 85.6 0 ±0.71 for mentocervical angle. There was significant sexual and ethnic differences at P<0.05 using some of the angles. Keywords: Mentocervical angle,nasofacial angle, nasofrontal angle, nasolabial angle, nasomental angle. I. Introduction Over the years, it has been a difficult task to define the term beauty. To Plato and Aristotle, beauty meant symmetry, harmony and geometry. In the fifth century BC, the Greek Sculptor, Polyclitus defined perfect beauty as mutual harmony of all parts, such that harmonic proportions were held to be beautiful in themselves, independent of any observer[1]. Nevertheless, although every generation’s concept of beauty is influenced by social and cultural factors, the aesthetic canons have withstood the test of time[1]. As illustrated by the work of artists and anatomists of the 17 th to the 19 th centuries, the concept of beauty and “normal” facial proportions has changed with time. Furthermore, as population becomes more heterogeneous, new facial proportions have emerged from interracial mixing. It is now apparent that what has been considered beautiful and acceptable as the norm for one culture may be different for another. Inherently, the notion of a single aesthetic standard and beauty is grossly inadequate and naive. What is required is a new model of aesthetic standards and beauty that is unique to different ethnic groups to better fit their facial skeletal and skin profile and culture[2]. Morphological features of different races and ethnic groups are not randomly distributed but appear in geographical cluster thus there is a need for facial study of different ethnic groups to establish specific anthropometric data for populations with different ethnic backgrounds[3]. Facial traits are largely influenced by race, ethnic group, age, sex and culture[4]. The face is divided into aesthetic units that are further divided into subunits. The major units that are classically defined for facial analysis include the forehead, eyes, nose, lips, chin, ears and neck[1]. Because the nose is the central and most prominent aesthetic unit of the face, it is always analyzed in relationship to other facial structures most importantly, the chin, the lips and the eyebrows. Currently, major parameters used in facial aesthetics are based on Powell and Humpherys[5]. These authors formulated suitable relationships between the face and the nose and defined facial angles. The facial angles include the nasofacial, the nasofrontal, the nasolabial, the nasomental and the mentocervical angles. This study therefore intends to report a baseline data of aesthetic facial angles among the Ibo and Yoruba ethnic groups of Nigeria and also to determine any sex or ethnic variations. II. Materials And Methods Four hundred and seventy-seven subject (290 males and 187 females) within 18-35 years age range. Demographical data including age, place of birth, length of stay in the place and parental and grandparental heritage was got. Subjects with facial asymmetry, congenital abnormalities, facial fractures or maxillofacial surgeries were excluded from the study.