A field comes of age: Geometric morphometrics in the 21st century

Hystrix

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2013, Pages

  Adams, Dean C ^a   Rohlf, F James ^b   Slice, Dennis E ^c  

^a Department of Statistics Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic Evidence Iowa State University 2438 Osborn Dr Ames   (United States)

^b STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Morphology; Procrustes analysis; Shape analysis; Statistics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875767161     PISSN: 03941914     EISSN: 18255272     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4404/hystrix-24.1-6283     Document Type: Article

References (142)

1. Adams D.C., 2010. Parallel evolution of character displacement driven by competitive selection in terrestrial salamanders. BMC Evol. Biol. 10: 1-10.
2. Adams D.C., 2011. Quantitative genetics and evolution of head shape in Plethodon salamanders. Evol. Biol. 38: 278-286.
3. 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.
4. Adams D.C., Cerney M.M., 2007. Quantifying biomechanical motion using Procrustes motion analysis. J. Biomech. 40: 437-444.
5. Adams D.C., Collyer M.L., 2007. The analysis of character divergence along environmental gradients and other covariates. Evolution 61: 510-515.
6. Adams D.C., Collyer M.L., 2009. A general framework for the analysis of phenotypic trajectories in evolutionary studies. Evolution 63: 1143-1154.
7. Adams D.C., Nistri A., 2010. Ontogenetic convergence and evolution of foot morphology in European cave salamanders (Family: Plethodontidae). BMC Evol. Biol. 10: 1-10.
8. Adams D.C., Otárola-Castillo E., 2013. geomorph: an R package for the collection and analysis of geometric morphometric shape data. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 4: 393-399. http://cran.r-project.org/package=geomorph
9. Adams D.C., Rohlf F.J., 2000. Ecological character displacement in Plethodon: biomechanical differences found from a geometric morphometric study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 97: 4106-4111.
10. Adams D.C., Rohlf F.J., Slice D.E. 2004. Geometric morphometrics: ten years of progress following the "revolution". It. J. Zool. 71: 5-16.
11. Adams D.C., Rosenberg M.S., 1998. Partial warps, phylogeny, and ontongeny: a comment on Fink and Zelditch (1995). Syst. Biol. 47:168-173.
12. Albert M.H., Le H., Small C.G., 2003. Assessing landmark influence on shape variation. Biometrika 90: 669-678.
13. Blackith R.E., Reyment R.A., 1971. Multivariate Morphometrics. Academic Press, New York.
14. Blomberg S.P., Garland T., Ives A.R., 2003. Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution 57: 717-745.
15. Boas F., 1905. The Horizontal Plane of the Skull and the General Problem of the Comparison of Variable Forms. Science 21: 862-863.
16. Boell L., Gregorová S., Forejt J., Tautz D., 2011. A comparative assessment of mandible shape in a consomic strain panel of the house mouse (Mus musculus) - implications for epistasis and evolvability of quantitative traits. BMC Evol. Biol. 11(309): 1-12.
17. Bookstein F.L., 1986. Size and shape spaces for landmark data in two dimensions. (With discussion and rejoinder). Statistical Science 1: 181-242.
18. Bookstein F.L., 1989. Principal warps: thin-plate splines and the decomposition of deformations. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 11: 567-585.
19. Bookstein F.L., 1991. Morphometric tools for landmark data: Geometry and Biology. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.
20. Bookstein F.L., 1996. Biometrics, biomathematics and the morphometric synthesis. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology 58: 313-365.
21. Bookstein F.L., 1997. Landmark methods for forms without landmarks: morphometrics of group differences in outline shape. Medical Image Analysis 1: 225-243.
22. Bookstein F.L., 2013. Allometry for the Twenty-First century. Biol. Theory 7(1): 10-25. doi:10.1007/s13752-012-0064-0
23. Bookstein F.L., 2012b. Random walk as a null model for high-dimensional morphometrics of fossil series: geometrical considerations. Paleobiology 39(1): 52-74.
24. Bookstein F.L., Gunz P., Mitteroecker P., Prossinger H., Schaefer K., Seidler H., 2003. Cranial integration in Homo: singular warps analysis of the midsagittal plane in ontogeny and evolution. J. Hum. Evol. 44: 167-187.
25. Bookstein F.L., Schafer K., Prossinger H., Seidler H., Fieder M., Stringer G., Weber G.W., Arsuaga J.-L., Slice D.E., Rohlf F.J., Recheis W., Mariam A.J., Marcus L.F., 1999. Comparing frontal cranial profiles in archaic and modern Homo by morphometric analysis. Anat. Rec. (New Anat.) 257: 217-224.
26. Burgio G., Baylac M., Heyer E., Montagutelli X., 2009. Genetic analysis of skull shape variation and morphological integration in the mouse using interspecific recombinant congenic strains between C57BL/6 and mice of the Mus spretus species. Evolution 63: 2668-2686.
27. Butler M.A., King A.A., 2004. Phylogenetic comparative analysis: a modeling approach for adaptive evolution. Am. Nat. 164: 683-695.
28. Butler M.A., Schoener T.W., Losos J.B., 2000. The relationship between sexual size dimorphism and habitat use in Greater Antillean Anolis lizards. Evolution 54: 259-272.
29. Cardini A., Elton S., 2008. Does the skull carry a phylogenetic signal? Evolution and modularity in the guenons. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 93: 813-834.
30. Catalano S.A., Goloboff P.A., 2012. Simultaneously mapping and superimposing landmark configurations with parsimony as optimality criterion. Syst. Biol. 61(3): 392-400.
31. Caumul R., Polly D., 2005. Phylogenetic and environmental components of morphological variation: skull, mandible, and molar shape in marmots (Marmota, Rodentia). Evolution 59: 2460-2472.
32. Claude J., 2008. Morphometrics with R. Springer, New York.
33. Cock A.G., 1966. Genetical aspects of metrical growth and form in animals. Quart. Rev. Biol. 41: 131-190.
34. Collyer M.L., Adams D.C., 2007. Analysis of two-state multivariate phenotypic change in ecological studies. Ecology 88: 683-692.
35. Collyer M.L., Adams D.C., 2013. Phenotypic trajectory analysis: comparison of shape change patterns in evolution and ecology. Hystrix 24(1) (Online First). doi:10.4404/hystrix-24.1-6298
36. Corti M., 1993. Geometric morphometrics: An extension of the revolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 8: 302-303.
37. Couette S., White J., 2010. 3D geometric morphometrics and missing data. Can extant taxa give clues for the analysis of fossil primates? Comptes Rendus Palevol 9: 423-433.
38. Cox P.G., Fagan M.J., Rayfield E.J., Jeffery N., 2011. Finite element modelling of squirrel, guinea pig and rat skulls: using geometric morphometrics to assess sensitivity. J. Anat. 219: 696-709.
39. Darwin C., 1859. On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life. Murray, London.
40. Decker L., Berge C., Renous S., Penin X., 2007. An alternative approach to normalization and evaluation for gait patterns: Procrustes analysis applied to the cyclograms of sprinters and middle-distance runners. J. Biomech. 40: 2078-2087.
41. Drake A.G., Klingenberg C.P., 2008. The pace of morphological change: Historical transformation of skull shape in St Bernard dogs. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Biological Sciences 275: 71-76.
42. Dryden I.L., 2012. shapes: Statistical shape analysis. R package version 1.1-8. http://cran.r-project.org/package=shapes
43. Dryden I.L., Mardia K.V., 1993. Multivariate shape analysis. Sankhya 55: 460-480.
44. Dryden I.L., Mardia K.V., 1998. Statistical shape analysis. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
45. Dumont E.R., Piccirillo J., Grosse I.R., 2005. Finite element analysis of biting behavior and bone stress in the facial skeletons of bats. Anat. Rec. 293: 319-330.
46. Fink W.L., Zelditch M.L., 1995. Phylogenetic analysis of ontogenetic shape transformations: a reassessment of the piranha genus Pygocentrus (Teleostei). Syst. Biol. 44: 344-361.
47. Galton F., 1907. Classification of Portraits. Nature 76: 617-618.
48. Goloboff P.A., Catalano S.A., 2011. Phylogenetic morphometrics (II): algorithms for landmark optimization. Cladistics 27: 42-51.
49. Gómez J.M., Abdelaziz M., Muñoz-Pajares J., Perfectti F., 2009. Heritability and genetic correlation of corolla shape and size in Erysimum mediohispanicum. Evolution 63: 1820-1831.
50. Gonzalez-Jose R., Escapa I., Neves W.A., Cuneo R., Pucciarelli H.M., 2008. Cladistic analysis of continuous modularized traits provides phylogenetic signals in Homo evolution. Nature 453: 775-779.
51. Gower J.C., 1975. Generalized Procrustes analysis. Psychometrika 40: 33-51.
52. Groning F., Fagan M.J., O'Higgins P., 2011. The effects of the periodontal ligament on mandibular stiffness: a study combining finite element analysis and geometric morphometrics. J. Biomech. 44: 1304-1312.
53. Gunz P., Mitteroecker P., Bookstein F.L., 2005. Semilandmarks in three dimensions. In: Slice D.E. (Ed.). Modern morphometrics in physical anthropology. Klewer Academic/Plenum, New York, pp. 73-98.
54. Gunz P., Mitteroecker P., Neubauer S., Weber G.W., Bookstein F.L., 2009. Principles for the virtual reconstruction of hominin crania. J. Hum. Evol. 57: 48-62.
55. Hammond P., Hutton T.J., Allanson J.E., Campbell L.E., Hennekam R.C.M., Holden S., Patton M.A., Shaw A., Temple I.K., Trotter M., Murphy K.C., Winter R.M. 2004. 3D analysis of facial morphology. Am. J. Med. Genet. 126A: 339-348.
56. Huxley J.S., 1932. Problems of relative growth. Methuen, London. Reprinted in 1993 by Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
57. Jolicoeur P., 1963. The multivariate generalization of the allometry equation. Biometrics 19: 497-499.
58. Kendall D.G., 1981. The statistics of shape. In: Barnett V. (Ed). Interpreting multivariate data. Wiley, New York, pp. 75-80.
59. Kendall D.G., 1984. Shape-manifolds, Procrustean metrics and complex projective spaces. Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society 16: 81-121.
60. Kendall D.G., 1985. Exact distributions for shapes of random triangles in convex sets. Adv. Appl. Prob. 17: 308-329.
61. Kent J.T., Mardia K.V., 2001. Shape, Procrustes tangent projections and bilateral symmetry. Biometrika 88: 469-485.
62. Klingenberg C.P., 2003. Quantitative genetics of geometric shape: heritability and the pitfalls of the univariate approach. Evolution 57: 191-195.
63. Klingenberg C.P., 2008. Morphological integration and developmental modularity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 39: 115-132.
64. Klingenberg C.P., 2009. Morphometric integration and modularity in configurations of landmarks: tools for evaluating a priori hypotheses. Evol. Develop. 11: 405-421.
65. Klingenberg C.P., 2011. MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Molec. Ecol. Res. 11: 353-357.
66. Klingenberg C.P., Barluenga M., Meyer A., 2002. Shape analysis of symmetric structures: quantifying variation among individuals and asymmetry. Evolution 56: 1909-1920.
67. Klingenberg C.P., Debat V., Roff D.A., 2010. Quantitative genetics of shape in cricket wings: developmental integration in a functional structure. Evolution 64: 2935-2951.
68. Klingenberg C.P., Gidaszewski N.A., 2010. Testing and quantifying phylogenetic signals and homoplasy in morphometric data. Syst. Biol. 59: 245-261.
69. Klingenberg C.P., Leamy L.J., 2001. Quantitative genetics of geometric shape in the mouse mandible. Evolution 55: 2342-2352.
70. Klingenberg C.P., Leamy L.J., Cheverud J.M., 2004. Integration and modularity of quantitative trait locus effects on geometric shape in the mouse mandible. Genetics 166: 1909-1921.
71. Klingenberg C.P., McIntyre G.S., 1998. Geometric morphometrics of developmental instability: Analyzing patterns of fluctuating asymmetry with Procrustes methods. Evolution 52: 363-1375.
72. Klingenberg C.P., Monteiro L.R., 2005. Distances and directions in multidimensional shape spaces: implications for morphometric applications. Syst. Biol. 54: 678-688.
73. Klingenberg K.P., 1996. Multivariate allometry. In: Marcus L.F., Corti M., Loy A., Naylor G.J.P., Slice D.E. (Eds). Advances in Morphometrics. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 23-49.
74. Lynch M., Walsh B., 1998. Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland.
75. MacLeod N., 2002. Phylogenetic signals in morphometric data. In: MacLeod N., Forey P.L. (Eds.). Morphology, shape and phylogeny. Taylor and Francis, London, pp. 100-138.
76. MacLeod N., 2008. Understanding morphology in systematic contexts: 3D specimen ordination and 3D specimen recognition. In: Wheeler Q. (Ed.). The New Taxonomy. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, London, pp. 143-210.
77. Magwene P.M., 2001. New tools for studying integration and modularity. Evolution 55: 1734-1745.
78. Magwene P.M., 2009. Statistical methods for studying modularity: a reply to Mitteroecker and Bookstein. Syst. Biol. 58: 146-149.
79. Marcus L.F., 1990. Traditional morphometrics. In: Rohlf F.J., Bookstein F.L. (Eds.). Proceedings of the Michigan morphometrics workshop. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor, pp. 77-122.
80. Mardia K.V., Bookstein F.L., Moreton I.J., 2000. Statistical assessment of bilateral symmetry of shapes. Biometrika 87: 285-300.
81. Marquez E.J., 2008. A statistical framework for testing modularity in multidimensional data. Evolution 62: 2688-2708.
82. Martínez-Abadías N., Esparza M., Sjøvold T., González-José R., Santos M., Hernández M., Klingenberg C.P., 2012. Pervasive genetic integration directs the evolution of human skull shape. Evolution 66: 1010-1023.
83. McCane B., Kean M.R., 2011. Integration of parts in the facial skeleton and cervical vertebrae. Am. J. Orthodont. Dento. Orthoped. 139: e13-e30.
84. McPeek M.A., Shen L., Torrey J.Z., Farid H., 2008. The tempo and mode of threedimensional morphological evolution in male reproductive structures. Am. Nat. 171: E158-E178.
85. Mitteroecker P., 2009. The developmental basis of variational modularity: insights from quantitative genetics, morphometrics, and developmental biology. Evol. Biol. 36: 377-385.
86. Mitteroecker P., Bookstein F.L., 2007. The conceptual and statistical relationship between modularity and morphological integration. Syst. Biol. 56: 818-836.
87. Mitteroecker P., Bookstein F.L., 2008. The evolutionary role of modularity and integration in the hominoid cranium. Evolution 62: 943-958.
88. Mitteroecker P., Bookstein F.L., 2009. Examining modularity via partial correlations: a rejoinder to a comment by Paul Magwene. Syst. Biol. 58: 346-348.
89. Mitteroecker P., Gunz P., 2009. Advances in geometric morphometrics. Evol. Biol. 36: 235-247.
90. Mitteroecker P., Gunz P., Bernhard M., Schaefer K., Bookstein F.L., 2004. Comparison of cranial ontogenetic trajectories among great apes and humans. J. Hum. Evol. 46: 679-698.
91. Monteiro L.R., Diniz-Filho J.A.F., Reis S.F.D., Araujo E.D., 2002. Geometric estimates of heritability in biological shape. Evolution 56: 563-572.
92. Monteiro L.R., Diniz-Filho J.A.F., Reis S.F.D., Araujo E.D., 2003. Shape distances in general linear models: Are they really at odds with the goals of morphometrics? A reply to Klingenberg. Evolution 57: 196-199.
93. Monteiro L.R., Nogueira M.R., 2011. Evolutionary patterns and processes in the radiation of phyllostomid bats. BMC Evol. Biol. 11(137): 1-23.
94. Myers E.M., Janzen F.J., Adams D.C., Tucker J.K., 2006. Quantitative genetics of plastron shape in slider turtels (Trachemys scripta). Evolution 60: 563-572.
95. Neeser R., Ackermann R.R., Gain J., 2009. Comparing the accuracy and precision of three techniques used for estimating missing landmarks when reconstructing fossil hominin crania. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 140: 1-18.
96. O'Higgins P., 2000. The study of morphological variation in the hominid fossil record: biology, landmarks and geometry. J. Anat. 197: 103-120.
97. O'Higgins P., Cobb S.N., Fitton L.C., Groning F., Phillips R., Liu J., Fagan M.J., 2011. Combining geometric morphometrics and functional simulation: an emerging toolkit for virtual functional analyses. J. Anat. 218: 3-15.
98. O'Higgins P., Jones N., Ghattaura A., Hutton T., Carr M. 2002. Geometric morphometric approaches to the study of soft tissue growth and expression in the human face. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. Supp. 34: 119.
99. O'Meara B.C., Ane C., Sanderson M.J., Wainwright P.C., 2006. Testing for different rates of continuous trait evolution using likelihood. Evolution 60: 922-933.
100. Olson E.C., Miller R.L., 1951. A mathematical model applied to a study of the evolution of species. Evolution 5: 325-338.
101. Olson E.C., Miller R.L., 1958. Morphological Integration. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
102. Oxnard C., O'Higgins P., 2011. Biology Clearly Needs Morphometrics. Does Morphometrics Need Biology? Biol. Theory 4: 84-97.
103. Parr W.C.H., Wroe S., Chamoli U., Richards H.S., McCurry M.R., Clausen P.D., McHenry C., 2012. Toward integration of geometric morphometrics and computational biomechanics: New methods for 3D virtual reconstruction and quantitative analysis of Finite Element Models. J. Theor. Biol. 301: 1-14.
104. Parsons K.J., Marquez E., Albertson R.C., 2012. Constraint and opportunity: the genetic basis and evolution of modularity in the cichlid mandible. Am. Nat. 179: 64-78.
105. Pierce S.E., Angielczyk K.D., Rayfield E.J., 2008. Patterns of morphospace occupation and mechanical performance in extant crocodilian skulls: a combined geometric morphometric and finite element modeling approach. J. Morph. 269: 840-864.
106. Piras P., Colangelo P., Adams D.C., Buscalioni A., Cubo J., Kotsakis T., Meloro C., Raia P., 2010. The Gavialis-Tomistoma debate: the contribution of skull ontogenetic allometry and growth trajectories to the study of crocodylian relationships. Evol. Develop. 12: 568-579.
107. Revell L.J., Harmon L.J., 2008. Testing quantitative genetic hypotheses about the evolutionary rate matrix for continuous characters. Evol. Ecol. Res. 10: 311-331.
108. Reyment R.A., 1991. Multidimensional paleobiology. Pergamon Press, New York.
109. Reyment R.A., 1996. An idiosyncratic history of early morphometrics. In: Marcus L.F., Corti M., Loy A., Naylor G.J.P., Slice D.E. (Eds.). Advances in Morphometrics. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 15-22.
110. Rivera G., Stayton C.T., 2011. Finite element modeling of shell shape in the freshwater turtle Pseudemys concinna reveals a trade-off between mechanical strength and hydrodynamic efficiency. J. Morph. 272: 1192-1203.
111. Rohlf F.J., 1998. On applications of geometric morphometrics to studies of ontogeny and phylogeny. Syst. Biol. 47: 147-158.
112. Rohlf F.J., 1999a. On the use of shape spaces to compare morphometric methods. Hystrix 11: 1-17.
113. Rohlf F.J., 1999b. Shape statistics: Procrustes superimpositions and tangent spaces. Journal of Classification 16: 197-223.
114. Rohlf F.J., 2000. Statistical power comparisons among alternative morphometric methods. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. Supp. 111: 463-478.
115. Rohlf F.J., 2002. Geometric morphometrics and phylogeny. In: Macleod N., Forey P. (Eds.). Morphology, shape, and phylogeny. Taylor & Francis, London, pp. 175-193.
116. Rohlf F.J., 2003. Bias and error in estimates of mean shape in morphometrics. J. Hum. Evol. 44: 665-683.
117. Rohlf F.J., 2010. tpsRelw: Relative warps analysis. Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY.
118. Rohlf F.J., Corti, M., 2000. The use of partial least-squares to study covariation in shape. Syst. Biol. 49: 740-753.
119. Rohlf F.J., Marcus L.F., 1993. A revolution in morphometrics. Trends Ecol. Evol. 8: 129-132.
120. Rohlf F.J., Slice D.E., 1990. Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Syst. Zool. 39: 40-59.
121. Savriama Y., Klingenberg C.P., 2011. Beyond bilateral symmetry: geometric morphometric methods for any type of symmetry. BMC Evol. Biol. 11(280): 1-20.
122. Schaefer K., Lauc T., Mitteroecker P., Gunz P., Bookstein F.L., 2006. Dental Arch Asymmetry in an Isolated Adriatic Community. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 129: 132-142.
123. Serb J.M., Alejandrino A., Otárola-Castillo E., Adams D.C., 2011. Morphological convergence of shell shape in distantly related scallop species (Mollusca: Pectinidae). Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 163: 571-584.
124. Sheets H.D., 2003. IMP-Integrated Morphometrics Package, version 7, Department of Physics, Canisius College, Buffalo, New York. Available from http://www.canisius/edu/sheets/morphsoft.html.
125. Shen L., Farid H., McPeek M.A., 2009. Modeling 3-dimensional morphological structures using spherical harmonics. Evolution 63: 1003-1016.
126. Sidlauskas B.L., Mol J.H., Vari R.P., 2011. Dealing with allometry in linear and geometric morphometrics: a taxonomic case study in the Leporinus cylindriformis group (Characiformes: Anostomidae) with description of a new species from Suriname. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 162: 103-130.
127. Slice D.E., 1998. Morpheus et al.: software for morphometric research. Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York, Stony Brook, New York.
128. Slice D.E., 1999. Geometric motion analysis. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. Supp. 28: 253-254.
129. Slice D.E., 2001. Landmark coordinates aligned by Procrustes analysis do not lie in Kendall's shape space. Syst. Biol. 50: 141-149.
130. Slice D.E., 2005. Modern morphometrics. In: Slice D.E. (Ed.). Modern morphometrics in physical anthropology. Klewer Press, New York, pp. 1-45.
131. Slice D.E., 2007. Geometric Morphometrics. Ann. Rev. Anthropol. 36: 261-281.
132. Sneath P.H.A., 1967. Trend-surface analysis of transformation grids. J. Zool. Lond. 151 65-122.
133. Society E., 2012. EVAN Toolbox. build 1626, Vienna. Available from www.evan-society.org.
134. Stayton C.T., 2009. Applications of thin-plate spline transformations to finite element models, or, how to turn a bog turtle into a spotted turtle to analyze both. Evolution 63: 1348-1355.
135. Strauss R.G., Bookstein F.L., 1982. The truss: body form reconstructions in morphometrics. Syst. Zool. 31: 113-135.
136. Swiderski D.L., Zelditch M.L., Fink W.L., 2002. Comparability, morphometrics and phylogenetic systematics. In: MacLeod N., Forey P.L. (Eds.). Morphology, shape and phylogeny. Taylor & Francis, London, pp. 67-99.
137. Thompson D.W., 1915. Morphology and mathematics. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh 50: 857-895.
138. Thompson D.W., 1917. On Growth and Form. Cambridge, London.
139. van der Linde K., Houle D., 2009. Inferring the nature of allometry from geometric data. Evol. Biol. 36: 311-322.
140. Walker J.A., 2000. The ability of geometric morphometric methods to estimate a known covariance matrix. Syst. Biol. 49: 686-696.
141. Weber G.W., Bookstein F.L., 2011. Virtual anthropology: a guide to a new interdisciplinary field. Springer Verlag.
142. Weber G.W., Bookstein F.L., Strait D.S., 2011. Virtual anthropology meets biomechanics. J. Biomech. 44: 1429-1432.