Allometric slopes not underestimated by ordinary least squares regression: A case study with Enchenopa treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae)

Annals of the Entomological Society of America

Volumn 104, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 562-566

  Al Wathiqui, Nooria ^a   Rodríguez, Rafael L ^b  

^a TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

Author keywords

Enchenopa binotata; genitalia; static allometry; trait size scaling on body size

Indexed keywords

ALLOMETRY; BODY SIZE; ERROR ANALYSIS; ESTIMATION METHOD; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; MEASUREMENT METHOD; PLANTHOPPER; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SPIDER;

ARANEAE; ENCHENOPA; ENCHENOPA BINOTATA; HEMIPTERA; HEXAPODA; MEMBRACIDAE;

EID: 79955945765     PISSN: 00138746     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1603/AN10185     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Bonduriansky, R. 2007. Sexual selection and allometry: a critical reappraisal of the evidence and ideas. Evolution 61: 838-849 (Pubitemid 46537657)
2. Bondurianky, R., and T. Day. 2003. The evolution of static allometry in sexually selected traits. Evolution 57: 2450-2458 (Pubitemid 37502550)
3. Cocroft, R. B., R. L. Rodríguez, and R. E. Hunt. 2008. Host shifts, the evolution of communication and speciation in the Enchenopa binotata complex of treehoppers, pp. 88-100. In K. Tilmon (ed.), Specialization, speciation, and radiation: the evolutionary biology of herbivorous insects University of California Press, Berkeley, CA
4. Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Wahwah, NJ
5. Eberhard,W.G. 2009. Static allometry and animal genitalia Evolution 63: 48-66
6. Eberhard,W.G., B. A. Huber, R. L. Rodríguez, R. D. Briceño, I. Salas, and V. Rodríguez. 1998. One size fits all? Relationship between the size and degree of variation in genitalia and other body parts in twenty species of insect and spiders. Evolution 52: 415-431 (Pubitemid 28222719)
7. Eberhard, W. G., B. A. Huber, and R. L. Rodríguez. 1999 DonÕt forget the biology: a reply to Green. Evolution 53: 1624-1627
8. Eberhard, W. G., R. L. Rodríguez, and M. Polihronakis 2009. Pitfalls in understanding the functional significance of genital allometry. Evolution 22: 435-445
9. Fuller, W. A. 2006. Measurement error models, 2nd ed. Wiley Interscience, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
10. Green, A. J. 1999. Allometry of genitalia in insects and spiders: one size does not fit all. Evolution 53: 1621-1624
11. Kodric-Brown, A., R. M. Sibly, and J. H. Brown. 2006. The allometry of ornaments and weapons. Proc. Natl. Acad Sci. U.S.A. 103: 8733-8738 (Pubitemid 43878088)
12. McArdle, B. H. 1988. The structural relationshipÑregression in biology. Can. J. Zool. 66: 2329-2339
13. Pratt, G., and T. K. Wood. 1993. Genitalic analysis of males and females in the Enchenopa binotata (Say) complex (Membracidae: Homoptera). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash 95: 574-582
14. Rasband, W. S. 1997-2009. ImageJ. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. (http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij)
15. Sokal, R. R., and F. J. Rohlf. 1995. Biometry, 5th ed. Freeman and Company, New York
16. Tomkins, J. L., N. R. LeBas, M. P. Witton, D. M. Martill, and S. Humphries. 2010. Positive allometry and the prehistory of sexual selection. Am. Nat. 176: 141-148