Summary

Morphology, Shape and Phylogeny

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 287-294

  Forey, Peter L ^a  

^a DEPARTMENT OF LIFE SCIENCES   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33744979099     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1201/9780203165171     Document Type: Chapter

References (15)

1. Bookstein, F. L. (1994) ‘Can biometrical shape be a homologous character?', in Hall, B. K. (ed.) Homology: the hierarchical basis of comparative biology, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 197-227.
2. Bookstein, F. L. (1997) ‘Landmark methods for forms without landmarks: localizing group differences in outline shape’, Medical Image Analysis, 1, 225-243.
3. Brower, A. V. Z. and Schawaroch, V. (1996) ‘Three steps of homology assessment’, Cladistics, 12, 265-272.
4. David, B. and Laurin, B. (1996) ‘Morphometrics and cladistics: measuring phylogeny in the sea urchin Echinocardium’, Evolution, 50, 348-359.
5. Felsenstein, J. (1985) ‘Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap’, Evolution, 39, 783-791.
6. Forey, P. L. (1991) ‘Latimeria chalumnae and its pedigree’, Environmental Biology of Fishes, 32, 75-97.
7. Hawkins, J. A. (2000) ‘A survey of primary homology assessment: different botanists perceive and define characters in different ways’, in Scotland, R. W. and Pennington, R. T. (eds) Homology and systematics: coding characters for phylogenetic analysis, London: Taylor & Francis, pp. 22-53.
8. Hilton, E. J. and Bemis, W. E. (1999) ‘Skeletal variation in shortnosed sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) from the Connecticut River: implications for comparative ostelogical study of fossil and living fishes’, in Arratia, G. and Schultze, H.-P. (eds) Mesozoic fishes 2 - systematics and the fossil record, München: Dr Friedrich Pfeil, pp. 69-94.
9. MacLeod, N. (1999) ‘Generalizing and extending the eigenshape method of shape space visualization and analysis’, Paleobiology, 25, 107-138.
10. Pimental, R. A. and Riggins, R. (1987) ‘The nature of cladistic data’, Cladistics, 3, 201-209.
11. Rae, T. and Koppe, T. (2000) ‘Isometric scaling of maxillary sinus volume in hominoids’, Journal of Human Evolution, 38, 411-423.
12. Stevens, P. F. (2000) ‘On characters and character states: do overlapping and non-overlapping variation, morphology and molecules all yield data of the same value?', in Scotland, R. W. and Pennington, R. T. (eds) Homology and systematics: coding characters for phylogenetic analysis, London: Taylor & Francis, pp. 81-105.
13. Whitehead, P. J. P. (1985) ‘FAO species catalogue. Vol. 7. Clupeoid fishes of the world (suborder Clupeoidei). Part 1 - Chirocentridae, Clupeidae and Pristigasteridae’, FAO Fisheries Synopsis No. 125, 7, 1-303.
14. Wiens, J. J. (2000) ‘Coding morphological variation within species and higher taxa for phylogenetic analysis’, in Wiens, J. J. (ed.) Phylogenetic analysis of morphological data, Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 115-145.
15. Zelditch, M. L., Fink, W. L. and Swiderski, D. L. (1995) ‘Morphometrics, homology, and phylogenetics: quantified characters as synapomorphies’, Systematic Biology, 44, 179-189.