Simultaneously mapping and superimposing landmark configurations with parsimony as optimality criterion

Systematic Biology

Volumn 61, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 392-400

  Catalano, S A ^a,b   Goloboff, P A ^a,c  

^a Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientííficas y Técnicas ^*  (Argentina)

^b FUNDACIÓN MIGUEL LILLO   (Argentina)

^c UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE TUCUMÁN   (Argentina)

Author keywords

Landmark configuration; mapping; optimization; parsimony; phylogeny; superimposition

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; METHODOLOGY; PHYLOGENY;

ALGORITHMS; CLASSIFICATION; PHYLOGENY;

EID: 84860208522     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: 1076836X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syr119     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Adams D.C., Cardini A., Monteiro L.R., O'Higgins P., Rohlf F.J. 2011. Morphometrics and phylogenetics: principal components of shape from cranial modules are neither appropriate nor effective cladistic characters. J. Hum. Evol. 60:240-243.
2. Adams D., Rosenberg M. 1998. Partial warps, phylogeny, and ontogeny: a comment on Fink and Zelditch (1995). Syst. Biol. 47: 168-173.
3. Ast ?a D. 2009. Evolution of scapula size and shape in didelphid marsupials (Didelphimorphia: Didelphidae). Evolution. 63:2438-2456.
4. Benson R.H., Chapman R.E., Siegel A.F. 1982. On the measurement of morphology and its change. Paleobiology. 8:328-339.
5. Bookstein F.L. 1982. Foundations of morphometrics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 13:451-470.
6. Bookstein F.L. 1994. Can biometrical shape be a homologous character? In: Hall B.K., editor. Homology: the hierarchical basis of comparative biology. New York: Academic Press. p. 197-227.
7. Bookstein F.L. 2002. Creases as morphometric characters. In: MacLeod N., Forey P., editors. Morphology, shape and phylogeny. Systematics association special volume series 64. London: Taylor & Francis. p. 139-174.
8. Catalano S.A., Goloboff P.A., Gianinni N. 2010. Phylogenetic morphometrics (I): the use of landmark data in a phylogenetic framework. Cladistics. 26:539-549.
9. De Laet J. 2005. Parsimony and the problem of inapplicables in sequence data. In: Albert V.A., editor. Parsimony, phylogeny, and genomics. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 81-116.
10. Dryden I.L., Walker G. 1999. Highly resistant regression and object matching. Biometrics. 55:820-825. (Pubitemid 29427083)
11. Farris J. 1983. The logical basis of phylogenetic analysis. In Platnick N.I., Funk V.A., editors. Advances in cladistics II. New York: Columbia University Press. p. 7-36.
12. Goloboff P.A., Farris J., Nixon K. 2003. T.N.T.: tree analysis using new technology. Program and documentation. Available from: http://www.zmuc.dk/ public/phylogeny/TNT.
13. Goloboff P.A., Farris J.S., Nixon K.C. 2008. TNT, a free program for phylogenetic analysis. Cladistics. 24:774-786.
14. Goloboff P.A., Catalano S.A. 2011. Phylogenetic morphometrics (II): algorithms for landmark optimization. Cladistics. 27:42-51.
15. Gonzlez-Jos R., Escapa I., Neves W., Cneo R., Pucciarelli N. 2008. Cladistic analysis of continuous modularized traits provides phylogenetic signals in Homo evolution. Nature. 453:775-778. (Pubitemid 351793776)
16. Gonzlez-Jos R., Escapa I., Neves W., Cneo R., Pucciarelli N. 2011. Morphometric variables can be analyzed using cladistic methods: a reply to Adams et al. J. Hum. Evol. 60:244-245.
17. Gower J.C. 1975. Generalized Procrustes analysis. Psychometrika. 40:33-51.
18. Harbach R.E., Kitching I.J. 1998. Phylogeny and classification of the Culicidae (Diptera). Syst. Entomol. 23:327-370. (Pubitemid 128464992)
19. Jones N.S., Moriarty J. 2010. Evolutionary inference for functional data: using Gaussian processes on phylogenies to study shape evolution. ArXiv:1004.4668.
20. Johnson W., Eizirik E., Pecon-Slattery J., Murphy W., Antunes A., Teeling E., O'Brian S. 2006. The late Miocene radiation of modern Felidae: a genetic assessment. Science. 311:73-77. (Pubitemid 43063060)
21. Kendall D.G. 1977. The diffusion of shape. Adv. Appl. Prob. 9:428-430.
22. Kendall D.G. 1984. Shape-manifolds, procrustean metrics and complex projective spaces. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 16:81-121.
23. Klingenberg C.P., Gidaszewski N.A. 2010. Testing and quantifying phylogenetic signals and homoplasy in morphometric data. Syst. Biol. 59:245-261.
24. Larsen R. 2008. L1 generalized Procrustes 2D shape alignment. J. Math. Imaging Vis. 31:189-194.
25. MacLeod N. 2002. Phylogenetic signal in morphometric data. In: MacLeod N., Forey P., editors. Morphology, shape and phylogeny. London: Taylor & Francis. p. 100-138.
26. Monteiro L. 2000. Why morphometrics is special: the problem with using partial warps as characters for phylogenetic inference. Syst. Biol. 49:796-800.
27. Naylor G. 1996. Can partial warp scores be used as cladistic characters? In: Marcus L.F., Corti M., Loy A., Naylor G., Slice D.E., editors. Advances in morphometrics. New York: Plenum. p. 519-530.
28. Richtsmeier J.T., DeLeon V.B., Lele S.R. 2002. The promise of geometric morphometrics. Yearb. Phys. Anthropol. 45:63-91. (Pubitemid 36109383)
29. Rohlf F.J. 2008. tpsRelw, ver. 1.39. Computer program and documentation, Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook.
30. Rohlf F.J. 1990. Rotational fit (Procrustes) methods. In: Rohlf F.J., Bookstein F.L., editors. Proceedings of the Michigan morphometrics workshop. Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan. p. 227-236.
31. Rohlf F.J., Slice D. 1990. Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Syst. Zool. 39:40-59.
32. Rohlf F.J. 1998. On application of geometric morphometrics to studies of ontogeny and phylogeny. Syst. Biol. 47:147-158. (Pubitemid 128449792)
33. Rohlf F.J. 2002. Geometric morphometrics and phylogeny. In: MacLeod N., Forey P., editors. Morphology, shape and phylogeny. London: Taylor & Francis. p. 175-193.
34. Sankoff D.D., Rousseau P., Cedergren R.J. 1973. Evolution of 5S RNA and the non-randomness of base replacement. Nature. 245: 232-233.
35. Sankoff D. 1975. Minimal mutation trees of sequences. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 28:35-42.
36. Sankoff D.D., Rousseau P. 1975. Locating the vertices of a Steiner tree in arbitrary space. Math. Program. 9:240-246.
37. Sankoff D.D., Cedergren R.J. 1983. Simultaneous comparison of three or more sequences related by a tree. In: Sankoff D.D. and Kruskal J.B., editors. Time warps, string edits, and macromolecules: the theory and practice of sequence comparison. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. p. 253-264.
38. Smith G.R. 1990. Homology in morphometrics and phylogenetics. In: Rohlf F.J., Bookstein F.L., editors. Proceedings of the Michigan morphometrics workshop. Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan. Special Publication 2.
39. Siegel A., Benson R. 1982. A robust comparison of biological shapes. Biometrics. 38:341-350.
40. Schwikowski B., Vingron M. 1997. The deferred path heuristic for the generalized tree alignment problem. J. Comput. Biol. 4:415-431. (Pubitemid 27355876)
41. Slice D.E. 1996. Three-dimensional generalized resistant fitting and the comparison of least-squares and resistant-fit residuals. In: Marcus L.F., Corti M., Loy A., Naylor G., Slice D.E., editors. Advances in morphometrics. New York: Plenum. p. 179-199.
42. Slice D.E. 2005. Modern morphometrics. In: Slice D.E., editor. Modern morphometricsinphysicalanthropology.NewYork:Kluwer. p. 1-45.
43. Stone J.R. 2003. Mapping cladograms into morphospaces. Acta Zool. 84:63-68. (Pubitemid 36453349)
44. Varn A., Vinh L.S., Wheeler W.C. 2010. POY version 4: phylogenetic analysis using dynamic homologies. Cladistics. 26:72-85.
45. Wheeler W.C. 1996. Optimization alignment: the end of multiple sequence alignment in phylogenetics? Cladistics. 12:1-9.
46. Wheeler W.C. 2003. Implied alignment: a synapomorphy-based multiple sequence alignment method and its use in cladogram search. Cladistics. 19:261-268. (Pubitemid 38069698)
47. Wheeler W.C., Aagesen L., Arango C.P., Faivovich J., Grant T., D'Haese C., Janies D., Smith W.L., Var ?n A., Giribet G. 2006. Dynamic homology and phylogenetic systematics: a unified approach using POY. New York: American Museum of Natural History. p. 365.
48. Zelditch M.L., Fink W.L., Swiderski D. 1995. Morphometrics, homology, and phylogenetics: quantified characters as synapomorphies. Syst. Biol. 44:179-189. (Pubitemid 126005870)
49. Zelditch M.L., Fink W.L., Swiderski D.L., Lundrigan B.L. 1998. On applications of geometric morphometrics to studies of ontogeny and phylogeny: a reply to Rohlf. Syst. Biol. 47:159-167. (Pubitemid 128062224)