Ratios as a size adjustment in morphometrics

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Simple ratios in which a measurement variable is divided by a size variable are commonly used but known to be inadequate for eliminating size correlations from morphometric data. Deficiencies in the simple ratio can be alleviated by incorporating regression coefficients describing the bivariate relationship between the measurement and size variables. Recommendations have included: 1) subtracting the regression intercept to force the bivariate relationship through the origin (intercept‐adjusted ratios); 2) exponentiating either the measurement or the size variable using an allometry coefficient to achieve linearity (allometrically adjusted ratios); or 3) both subtracting the intercept and exponentiating (fully adjusted ratios). These three strategies for deriving size‐adjusted ratios imply different data models for describing the bivariate relationship between the measurement and size variables (i.e., the linear, simple allometric, and full allometric models, respectively). Algebraic rearrangement of the equation associated with each data model leads to a correctly formulated adjusted ratio whose expected value is constant (i.e., size correlation is eliminated). Alternatively, simple algebra can be used to derive an expected value function for assessing whether any proposed ratio formula is effective in eliminating size correlations. Some published ratio adjustments were incorrectly formulated as indicated by expected values that remain a function of size after ratio transformation. Regression coefficients incorporated into adjusted ratios must be estimated using least‐squares regression of the measurement variable on the size variable. Use of parameters estimated by any other regression technique (e.g., major axis or reduced major axis) results in residual correlations between size and the adjusted measurement variable. Correctly formulated adjusted ratios, whose parameters are estimated by least‐squares methods, do control for size correlations. The size‐adjusted results are similar to those based on analysis of least‐squares residuals from the regression of the measurement on the size variable. However, adjusted ratios introduce size‐related changes in distributional characteristics (variances) that differentially alter relationships among animals in different size classes.

This publication has 55 references indexed in Scilit: