Differences between sliding semi‐landmark methods in geometric morphometrics, with an application to human craniofacial and dental variation
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 26 May 2006
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Anatomy
- Vol. 208 (6) , 769-784
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7580.2006.00576.x
Abstract
Over the last decade, geometric morphometric methods have been applied increasingly to the study of human form. When too few landmarks are available, outlines can be digitized as series of discrete points. The individual points must be slid along a tangential direction so as to remove tangential variation, because contours should be homologous from subject to subject whereas their individual points need not. This variation can be removed by minimizing either bending energy (BE) or Procrustes distance (D) with respect to a mean reference form. Because these two criteria make different assumptions, it becomes necessary to study how these differences modify the results obtained. We performed bootstrapped‐based Goodall'sF‐test, Foote's measurement, principal component (PC) and discriminant function analyses on human molars and craniometric data to compare the results obtained by the two criteria. Results show that: (1)F‐scores andP‐values were similar for both criteria; (2) results of Foote's measurement show that both criteria yield different estimates of within‐ and between‐sample variation; (3) there is low correlation between the first PC axes obtained by D and BE; (4) the percentage of correct classification is similar for BE and D, but the ordination of groups along discriminant scores differs between them. The differences between criteria can alter the results when morphological variation in the sample is small, as in the analysis of modern human populations.Keywords
This publication has 56 references indexed in Scilit:
- Effects of morphometric descriptor changes on statistical classification and morphospacesBiological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2004
- Combining geometric morphometrics with pattern recognition for the investigation of species complexesBiological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2003
- GEOMETRIC ESTIMATES OF HERITABILITY IN BIOLOGICAL SHAPEEvolution, 2002
- SKULL SHAPE AND SIZE DIVERGENCE IN DOLPHINS OF THE GENUS SOTALIA: A TRIDIMENSIONAL MORPHOMETRIC ANALYSISJournal of Mammalogy, 2002
- A COMPARISON OF PHENOTYPIC VARIATION AND COVARIATION PATTERNS AND THE ROLE OF PHYLOGENY, ECOLOGY, AND ONTOGENY DURING CRANIAL EVOLUTION OF NEW WORLD MONKEYSEvolution, 2001
- How well do multivariate data sets match? The advantages of a Procrustean superimposition approach over the Mantel testOecologia, 2001
- Functional and historical determinants of shape in the scapula of Xenarthran mammals: Evolution of a complex morphological structureJournal of Morphology, 1999
- R: A Language for Data Analysis and GraphicsJournal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 1996
- Biometrics, biomathematics and the morphometric synthesisBulletin of Mathematical Biology, 1996
- The use of quantitative traits in the study of human population structureAmerican Journal of Physical Anthropology, 1982