European Journal of Orthodontics 5 (1983) 233-240

© 1983 European Orthodontic Society

A comparison of cephalometric norms for

the African Bantu and a caucasoid
population
William Bacon*, Pierre Girardin* and Jean ChristopheTurlot**
*Departement d'Orthodontie and **Departement de Mathematiques, Strasbourg

Summary. Cephalometric standards are established and compared for 40 young

Cameroonian Africans and 40 White French students of similar ages, all of whom had perfect
Class I occlusion and none of whom had had orthodontic treatment. A factorial analysis of
correlation was undertaken to detect the main discriminant factors in the two groups.
The position and the angulation of the incisors appeared to be the strongest discriminant

Downloaded from by guest on June 25, 2015

factors. Higher values for convexity, ANB angle, SNB angle and lower face height were
representative racial characters in the Bantu: Upper face height and facial taper were
dominant traits in whites.

Introduction This study compares a standard cephalo-

Racial characteristics may lead to important
cephalometric variations. One set of stan-
dards cannot be used in cephalometric
analysis of all populations.
Few cephalometric studies have been
carried out on black African populations.
Bjork (1950) compared facial prognathism
in Bantu and Swedish populations. Jacobson
and Dreyer (1956) and Jacobson (1978)
published the results of studies on African
Bantu.
Reports on black American populations
have been published by Cotton et al. (1951),
Altemus (1959), Drummond (1968), Kowalski
and Walker (1974), Fonseca and Klein (1978)
but, because of the ethnic mixing that
has taken place among the American
black population, these results should be
applied with caution to African blacks,
who have remained relatively unmixed
ethnically and have quite different diatetic
habits.
metric determination in African black subjects
and a similar white group.
Material and methods
The black sample was selected from Cam-
eroonian Bantu students living in Strasbourg,
France. Only subjects with Class I molar and
canine occlusion and normal profile were
selected. All were in good health, in possession
of all their teeth and without any obvious
craniofacial abnormalities. None of the
subjects had had any orthodontic tooth
movement. The final sample consisted of 40
male subjects aged between 20 and 30 years.
The white sample was made up of 40 male
Caucasian students from Strasbourg Uni-
versity who fulfilled the same criteria.
Lateral cephalometric radiographs were
taken and each radiograph was traced twice
with an interval of several days. Only the
tracings that correspond with an accuracy of
Table 1 Mean and significance test for skeletal and dental measurements in the two populations
Bantus Caucasoids Significant

Variables Mean Maximum Minimum S.D. S.E. Mean Maximum Minimum S.D. S.E. P<0.05

VI Frankfort/Ba N 26.9 32.5 22.5 2.5 0.40 28.1 32.5 22.0 2.1 0.34 0.023
V2 BaSN 130.7 143.0 118.0 6.0 0.95 127.5 138.0 117.0 5.3 0.84 0.015
V3 SN Length 73.2 81.0 66.0 3.4 0.53 76.8 84.0 68.0 3.1 0.49 H.S.
V4 Facial Axis
CC Gn/Ba N angle 91.1 101.0 82.5 4.4 0.69 92.2 102.5 81.5 4.6 0.73
V5 Facial angle
Frankfurt/Facial Plane (NPo) 91.6 101.0 82.0 4.4 0.69 91.0 97.0 83.0 3.3 0.52 —
Downloaded from by guest on June 25, 2015

V6 SNA 88.1 109.0 81.0 5.3 0.84 84.1 95.0 76.5 3.8 0.61 H.S.
V7 SNB 84.1 100.5 75.0 5.0 0.79 81.5 88.5 73.0 3.8 0.60 0.011
V8 ANB 4.0 9.0 -0.5 2.4 0.38 2.4 8.0 -2.0 2.1 0.34 0.002
V9 Convexity (mm)
A point—facial plane 4.2 9.0 -0.5 2.3 0.36 1.1 9.0 -3.0 2.7 0.43 H.S.
V 10 "Wits" (mm)
Projection A and B points on
occlusal plane -3.0 6.0 -10.5 3.6 0.57 -0.1 5.0 -4.0 2.4 0.38 H.S. 03

V 11 Lower face height angle ANS-Xi-Po 49.5 59.5 37.0 5.3 0.83 45.2 52.5 38.0 3.9 0.62 H.S.
V 12 Upper face height (mm) N point to
projection ANS on NM line 53.3 60.0 46.0 2.9 0.46 57.1 76.0 51.0 4.5 0.72 H.S.
V 13 Lower face height (mm) Z
Projection of ANS to M point D
on NM line 77.8 97.0 60.0 6.8 1.10 71.0 79.0 56.0 5.2 0.82 H.S. O
V 14 Frankfort—Mandibular plane 22.4 35.0 5.0 7.9 1.20 19.4 35.0 8.0 5.7 0.90 0.041 C
V 15 Facial taper o
Mandibular/Facial plane 65.3 75.0 59.0 3.7 0.58 70.0 100.0 57.5 6.1 0.97 H.S. 2
V 16 Mandibular arc 5
Corpus/condyle axis (DC-Xi-Po) 32.8 45.0 24.0 5.5 0.87 32.9 44.0 17.0 5.6 0.89 — o
V 17 T-A. Pog. (mm) 7.4 12.0 4.0 2.2 0.35 1.6 6.0 -2.0 2.3 0.37 H.S.
V 18 T-A. Pog. (degrees) 29.4 40.0 20.0 4.9 0.77 24.6 38.0 14.0 4.5 0.72 H.S. X
V 19 1-A. Pog (degrees) 32.5 46.0 26.0 5.2 0.82 26.0 36.0 17.0 5.3 0.83 H.S. r
V 2 0 T-i 118.2 135.0 93.0 8.2 1.30 129.0 146.0 111.5 8.5 1.35 H.S.
V21 Lower lip E. Line (mm) 4.9 10.0 -1.0 2.4 0.38 -4.1 + 1.0 -11.0 2.9 0.46 H.S.

o
o
50
BANTU AND CAUCASOID CEPHALOMETRIC NORMS
at least 1 mm or 1° were used. The mean
values were rounded off to half a degree or
half a millimetre.
The cephalometric analysis was based on
Ricketts (1961) analysis but was complemen-
ted by further cephalometric measurements.
The 21 variables studied are shown in Table 1.
The values obtained from the two groups
were compared by Students t test, first with
separate variances and then with pooled
vaiiances to act as a control for the first
analysis. A factorial analysis of correlation
was also devised to detect the main dis-
criminant factors in the two groups.
Results and Discussion
The results are shown in Table 1.
The Cranial Base
VI The cranial deflection measurements
show very small standard deviations. The
minor difference between the mean for blacks
and whites is only slightly significant ( P =
0.023). In whites BaN has a more forward
and upward inclination relative to the
Frankfort plane.
V2 The cranial base angulation is higher for
the blacks but this is only slightly significant
(P=O.OI5).
V3 The cranial base is shorter for the
blacks. This difference, which has also been
demonstrated by Jacobson (1978), is highly
significant.
These findings show that the cranial
base structures are not strictly comparable
in the two populations and this should be
borne in mind when interpreting measure-
ments related to S, SN line or Ba N line.
Maxillo-facial Analysis
V4 The facial axis does not differ statis-
tically in the blacks and whites but it must be
remembered that the cranial deflections are
not identical and a correction for this dif-
235
ference would indicate a more dolichofacial
pattern for the blacks.
V5 The facial angle, which determines the
degree of chin protrusion, is slightly higher
in blacks but this difference is not statistically
significant.
V6, 7 and 8 The positions of A and B
points in the face are influenced by the position
of the incisors and their skeletal support. The
position of N, which is affected by the shorter
cranial base in blacks, also affects SNA and
SNB angles.
The SNA and SNB angles are signi-
ficantly higher in blacks than in whites and
the standard deviation is higher for blacks.
The difference in SNA angle is significantly
higher for the blacks, the difference in SNB
angle is less significant (P=0.011).
The SKB angle is clearly higher for
Downloaded from by guest on June 25, 2015
blacks, whereas the facial angle, which can
be used as another measurement of the
position of the mandible in the face, is not.
This may be explained by the fact that the B
point in the Bantu lies on or in front of A
Pog line as a result of the markedly pro-
truding lower incisors. The reverse applies in
the whites where the concavity of the sym-
physis is more pronounced.
V9 Convexity, which is a measure of the
antero-posterior position of the lower face
relative to the skull, is significantly higher for
Bantus. The high convexity and SNA angle
indicate the advanced position of A point
relative to the base of skull.
V10 The 'Wits' measurement describes the
intermaxillary sagittal relationship by refer-
ence to the occlusal plane. The significantly
lower values for blacks means that the man-
dible is further forward than the maxilla
along the occlusal plane, indicating a dolicho-
mandibular tendency with respect to the
maxilla in the Bantu.
V l l The lower facial height angle is signi-
ficantly higher for Bantus. This has also been
reported by Fonseca and Klein (1978).
V13 Wylie's vertical facial analysis con-
firms the previous observation. The lower
236 BANTU AND CAUCASOID CEPHALOMETRIC NORMS

face height is significantly more developed

in blacks than in whites which helps to
explain the high value of ANB angle in
Bantus.
V12 The upper face height, in contrast,
appears to be significantly less developed for
blacks than for whites. The standard devia-
tion for the upper face measurement is small
in the black subjects.
V14 The mandibular plane angle is steeper
relative to the Frankfort plane in the black
than in the white group but this difference is
only slightly significant (P=0.04). The man-
dibular pattern varies greatly among the
Bantu. The standard deviation was high for
this measurement. Figure 1 Typical profile of a Black, based on mean
values.
V15 The facial taper angle is significantly
lower for blacks than whites.
V16 The mandibular arc is about the same

Downloaded from by guest on June 25, 2015

for the two populations.

Dento-Maxillary Pattern
V17-21 As far as dento-facial make-up is
concerned, the Bantu are distinguished by
protrusion and labioversion of the upper and
of the lower incisors. All the angular and
linear measurements characteristic of the
upper and lower incisor position are mark-
edly increased and the interincisal angle is
much lower for the blacks than for the whites,
and all of these differences are highly signi-
ficant. The dental pattern gives rise, in turn,
to protrusion of the upper and lower lips far
beyond the E line.
Typical profiles of the two groups, based
on the mean values, are shown in Figures
1 and 2.
Factorial Analysis
A factorial analysis of correlation was under-
taken to detect the greatest differences
between the two groups. The aim was to find
a simple geometric representation, des-
cribing the relationships between the patients
represented by the variables. The variables,
called the principal components, are a linear
Figure 2 Typical profile of a White, based on mean
values.
combination of the 21 variables, not cor-
related and of maximum variance. These
factors give the best summary of the cor-
relation set structure. The principal plane
divides the information contained in the data
table into two groups, each of 50%. The
variables are plotted on a graph, and black
and white individuals are represented by
different symbols (Fig. 3).
The circle of correlations (Fig. 4) permits
accurate interpretation of the data.
The correlation matrix is shown in
Table 2. Correlation between two variables
in this study are significant for values above
.21 or below —.21 (P<0.05). Values above
BANTU A N D CAUCASOID CEPHALOMETR1C NORMS
©
©o • ©
.©
&.
Figure 3 Factorial analysis of correlations. Black population=«. White
population = O The two populations are dispersed in two specific areas, in accord-
ance with the variable distribution.
M*JC" nsCKNOMAMTS
Figure 4 The circle of correlations. The greater the
distance of a variable from the origin on the abscissa,
the more discriminant the character.
237
©
©
Downloaded from by guest on June 25, 2015
.28 or below —.28 represent highly signi-
ficant correlations (P<0.01).
The plotted samples (Fig. 3) show group-
ing of the two populations into precise areas.
The black subjects form a homogeneous
group on one side of the graph while the
white population, on the opposite side, is
slightly more dispersed signifying larger
variability in the white than in the black
group. There is only very slight overlap of
the two groups. This differential distribution
allows two axes to be clearly defined, an X
axis, dividing the two populations according
to the strongest variables, and a Y axis,
showing the variations and the correlations
in the whole sample regardless of racial
characters. Our interest is focused on the
distribution of the variables along the X
axis which discriminates between the two
populations.
Proximity of two or more variables on
the graph indicates a high correlation bet-
ween these variables which move in the same
Table 2 Correlation matrix. Correlations between two variables are significant for values above .21 or below .21 (P< .05). Values above .28 or below .28
are highly significant correlations (P<0.01)
CORRELATION MATRIX
VI 1.00
V2 .57 1.00
V3 -.69 -.51 1.00
V4 .40 - . 0 4 - . 6 6 1.00
Downloaded from by guest on June 25, 2015

V5 -.78 -.44 .79 - . 5 2 1.00

V6 .47 .32 - . 7 6 .58 - . 5 4 1.00
V7 -.20 -.06 .43 - . 5 4 .51 - . 2 0 1.00
V8 .08 - . 0 1 - . 0 5 - . 1 1 .07 .11 .67 1.00
V9 -.25 .01 .40 - . 5 5 .52 - . 1 8 .89 .51 1.00
VI0 -.39 -.26 .38 - . 3 5 .49 - . 2 6 .58 .30 .64 1.00
II1 .03 .03 - . 2 0 .36 - . 2 4 .11 - . 8 1 - . 8 5 - . 6 5 - . 4 0 1.00
V12 -.11 -.06 .33 - . 4 4 .31 - . 2 0 .80 .60 .78 .47 - . 8 9 1.00 >
V13 .24 .32 - . 0 7 - . 2 7 - . 0 2 .08 .46 .31 .45 .47 - . 2 7 .30
30 1.00
100 t\
VI4 .43 .51 - . 2 1 - . 2 2 - . 2 2 .17 .31 .21 .29 .03 - . 1 8 .19 .87 1.00
VI5 -.33 -.32 .31 - . 1 7 .40 - . 2 1 .42 .23 .44 .92 - . 2 6 .32 .42 - . 0 5 1.00 >
VI6 -.15 -.26 -.10 .38 - . 0 3 - . 0 0 - . 3 7 - . 1 4 - . 3 4 - . 3 4 .20 - .-.16
16 -.22 -.48 .42 1.00 O
VI7 -.28 -.07 .03 .04 - . 0 8 - . 0 9 - . 4 3 - . 3 4 - . 3 8 - . 2 4 .32 - . 2 3 - . 3 6 - . 2 9 - . 2 1 .19 1.00 n
V18 -.52 -.24 .56 - . 4 9 .75 - . 2 9 .57 .24 .52 .50 - . 3 0 .28 .24 .05 .42 - . 1 5 - . 3 1 1.00 £
VI9 -.27 .29 - . 2 5 - . 0 6 - . 0 6 .11 - . 3 3 - . 1 6 - . 2 5 - . 2 0 .22 - . 2 4 - . 2 7 - . 1 9 - . 2 4 .08 .39 - . 0 9 1.00 O
V20 .31 - . 0 0 - . 2 1 .35 - . 3 2 - . 0 1 - . 3 0 - . 0 8 - . 4 0 - . 3 3 .13 - . 1 4 - . 1 3 - . 0 2 - . 2 2 .18 .19 - . 1 7 - . 1 5 1.00 £
V21 .16 - . 0 8 - . 2 0 .24 - . 0 6 .26 .07 .19 .11 .15 - . 0 9 .01 - . 2 5 - . 3 6 .16 .14 - . 1 4 - . 0 7 - . 1 2 - . 2 1 1.00 2
VI V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10 VI1 VI2 V13 V14 V15 V16 V17 V18 V19 V20 V21 °
"~~~""~-'^^^^^~"^^^^^~~"~-^~~~~~—~^^^^^^^^^^^~^^^^^^^^^^^^^~^^^^^^^~^^^~^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^~^^^^^^^^^^^ m
X
>
s
2
m
50

o
Z
o
jo
BANTU AND CAUCASOID CEPHALOMETRIC NORMS
direction. Variables high in negative cor-
relation are diametrically opposed. The
greater the distance of the variable from
the centre of the circle in the direction of the
discriminant axis, the more significant the
specificity test.
Among the strongest coordinates in the
black population (Fig. 4) is a group of
variables covering VI7, V21, VI9 and, with
further extension, VI8.
VI7, V21 and VI9 represent lower
incisor position, upper incisor angulation
and labial protrusion respectively, and high
values for these variables, which are highly
correlated, are representative of specific
racial characteristics in blacks. VI8, which
indicates lower incisor inclination, is of less
marked racial specificity since it is plotted
closer to the origin.
Almost diametrically opposed to this
group of variables is V20, the inter-incisal
angle. A high value of V20 is the most
discriminating trait in whites.
A second grouping includes V8 and V9,
which represent convexity and ANB angle
respectively and are highly correlated. High
values for convexity and ANB angle are
highly characteristic of the black population.
A high SNA angle (V6) is more an
attribute of the black group, while SKB (V7),
which is plotted closer to the origin, is less
significant. The high correlation between
SNA and SNB is to be expected since both
groups had a normal occlusion with no Class
II or Class III deviation.
Another group associates V13 and VI1,
representing lower face height in millimetres
and degrees respectively. These components
appear to be relatively dominant character-
istics of the black group. They also show a
significant correlation with V14 which indi-
cates mandibular plane inclination but V14
is too close to the origin to be considered a
major discriminating trait. V14 is highly
negatively related to V16 (mandibular arc)
and to a lesser extent to V4 and V5 (facial
axis and facial plane).
V4, V5 and V6 are too close to the origin
to be regarded as discriminating variables
between the two populations.
239
VI2, representing upper face height, is
more important for the whites. Its position
relative to the ongin suggests that upper face
height is a differential character between the
populations.
A high facial taper angle (VI5) appears
to be a significantly discriminating character
in the white population but cranial base
angulation (V2) is of minor importance, being
situated almost on the centre of the circle.
Cranial deflection and SN length (VI
and V3) deviate more from this origin than
V2 but not enough to be considered as major
discriminants. VI, V2 and V3 do not show
high correlations with any other variable and
this also applies to V10 (Wits) which is not a
highly significant discriminating character,
although it is more important for the whites.
In conclusion, it appears that numerous
variables characteristic of the dento-maxillo-
facial architecture are significantly different
Downloaded from by guest on June 25, 2015
in the black and white populations studied.
Some discriminating characteristics are seen
to be stronger than others. The strongest
racial differences are related to the position
of the incisors and the lips, to the convexity
and ANB angle, to SNA angle, to the upper
and lower face height and to facial taper.
Address for correspondence
Professor William Bacon,
Faculte de Chirurgie Dentaire,
Univeisite Louis Pasteur,
1 Place de L'Hopital,
67000 Strasbourg,
France.
References
Altemus, L. S. (1959). Frequency of the
incidence of malocclusion in American
negro children—Ages 12-16 Angle Ortho-
dontist, 29: 189-200.
Bjork, A. (1950). Some biological aspects of
prognathism and occlusion of the teeth.
Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, 9: 1-40.
240
Cotton, W. N., Takano, W. S. and Wong,
W. M. (1951). The Downs analysis applied
to three other ethnic groups. Angle Ortho-
dontist, 21: 213-230.
Drummond, R. A. (1968). A determination of
cephalometric norms for the negro race.
American Journal of Orthodontics, 54:
670-682.
Fonseca R., Klein, W. (1978). A cephalo-
metric evaluation of American negro
women. American Journal of Orthodontics,
73: 152-159.
Jacobson, A. and Dreyer, C. J. (1956). The
facial pattern and occlusion of the African.
Journal of the Dental Association of South
Africa, 11:41-47.
BANTU AND CAUCASOID CEPHALOMETRIC NORMS
Jacobson, A. (1975). The 'Wits' appraisal
of jaw disharmony. American Journal of
Orthodontics, 67: 125-138.
Jacobson, A. (1976). Application of the Wits
appraisal. American Journal of Ortho-
dontics, 70: 179-189.
Jacobson, A. (1978). The craniofacial skeletal
pattern of the South African Negro.
American Journal of Orthodontics, 73:
681-690.
Kowalski, C. and Walker, G. (1974). Dif-
ferential diagnosis of adult male Black
and White population. Angle Orthodontist,
44: 346-350.
Ricketts, R. M. (1961). Cephalometric analy-
sis and synthesis. Angle Orthodontist, 31:
141-156.
Downloaded from by guest on June 25, 2015