Geometric morphometrics and phylogeny

Morphology, Shape and Phylogeny

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 175-193

  Rohlf, F James ^a  

^a STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85056403742     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1201/9780203165171     Document Type: Chapter

References (63)

1. Adams, D. C. (1999a) ‘Ecological character displacement in Plethodon and methods for shape analysis of articulated structures’, unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Ecology and evolution, Stony Brook, New York, State University of New York, p. 159.
2. Adams, D. C. (1999b) ‘Methods for shape analysis of landmark data from articulated structures’, Evolutionary Ecology Research, 1, 959-970.
3. Adams, D. C. and Rosenberg, M. S. (1998) ‘Partial warps, phylogeny, and ontogeny: a comment on Fink and Zelditch (1995)', Systematic Biology, 47, 168-173.
4. Bookstein, F. L. (1991) Morphometric tools for landmark data: geometry and biology, New York: Cambridge University Press.
5. Bookstein, F. L. (1994) ‘Can biometrical shape be a homologous character?', in Hall, B. K. (ed.) Homology: the hierarchical basis of comparative biology, New York: Academic Press, pp. 197-227.
6. Bookstein, F. L. (1996a) ‘Biometrics, biomathematics and the morphometric synthesis’, Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 58, 313-365.
7. Bookstein, F. L. (1996b) ‘A standard formula for the uniform shape component in landmark data’, in Marcus, L. F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Naylor, G. J. P. and Slice, D. E. (eds) Advances in morphometrics, New York: Plenum, pp. 153-168.
8. Bookstein, F. L. (1996c) ‘Visualizing group differences in outline shape: methods from biometrics of landmark points’, in Höhne, K. and Kikinis, R. (eds) Visualization in biomedical computing. Lecture notes in computer science, Amsterdam: Springer-Verlag, pp. 405-410.
9. Carpenter, S. J. and LaCasse, W. J. (1955) Mosquitoes of North America (north of Mexico), Los Angeles and California: University of California Press.
10. Dryden, I. L. and Mardia, K. V. (1993) ‘Multivariate shape analysis’, Sankhya, 55, 460-480.
11. Dryden, I. L. and Mardia, K. V. (1998) Statistical shape analysis. New York: Wiley.
12. Farris, J. S. (1970) ‘Methods for computing Wagner trees’, Systematic Zoology, 19, 83-92.
13. Felsenstein, J. (1985) ‘Phylogenies and the comparative method’, American Naturalist, 125, 1-15.
14. Felsenstein, J. (1988) ‘Phylogenies and quantitative characters’, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 192, 445-471.
15. Fink, W. L. and Zelditch, M. L. (1995) ‘Phylogenetic analysis of ontogenetic shape transformations: a reassessment of the piranha genus Pygocentrus (Teleostei)', Systematic Biology, 44, 344-361.
16. Garland, T. and Ives, A. R. (2000) ‘Using the past to predict the present: confidence intervals for regression equations in phylogenetic comparative methods’, American Naturalist, 155, 346-364.
17. Goodall, C. R. (1991) ‘Procrustes methods in the statistical analysis of shape (with discussion and rejoinder)', Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 53, 285-339.
18. Gower, J. C. (1971) ‘Statistical methods of comparing different multivariate analyses of the same data’, in Hodson, F. R., Kendall, D. G. and Tautu, P. (eds) Mathematics in the archaeological and historical sciences, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 138-149.
19. Gower, J. C. (1975) ‘Generalized Procrustes analysis’, Psychometrika, 40, 33-51.
20. Harbach, R. E. and Kitching, I. J. (1998) ‘Phylogeny and classification of the Culicidae (Diptera)', Systematic Entomology, 23, 327-370.
21. Huey, R. B. and Bennett, A. F. (1987) ‘Phylogenetic studies of coadaptation: preferred temperature versus optimal performance temperatures of lizards’, Evolution, 41, 1098-1115.
22. Kendall, D. G. (1984) ‘Shape-manifolds, Procrustean metrics and complex projective spaces’, Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society, 16, 81-121.
23. Kent, J. T. (1994) ‘The complex Bingham distribution and shape analysis’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 56, 285-299.
24. Kruskal, J. B. (1964a) ‘Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis’, Psychometrika, 29, 1-27.
25. Kruskal, J. B. (1964b) ‘Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: a numerical method’, Psychometrika, 29, 28-42.
26. Lele, S. (1993) ‘Euclidean distance matrix analysis: estimation of mean form and form difference’, Mathematical Geology, 25, 573-602.
27. Lele, S. and Cole, T. M. III. (1996) ‘A new test for shape differences when variance-covariance matrices are unequal’, Journal of Human Evolution, 31, 193-212.
28. Lele, S. and Richtsmeier, J. T. (1991) ‘Euclidean distance matrix analysis: a coordinate free approach for comparing biological shapes using landmark data’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 86, 415-427.
29. Maddison, W. P. (1991) ‘Squared-change parsimony reconstructions of ancestral states for continuous-valued characters on a phylogenetic tree’, Systematic Zoology, 40, 304-314.
30. Marcus, L. F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Naylor, G. J. P. and Slice, D. E. (1996) Advances in morphometrics, New York: Plenum.
31. Martins, E. P. (1999) ‘Estimation of ancestral states of continuous characters: a computer simulation study’, Systematic Biology, 48, 642-650.
32. Martins, E. P. and Hansen, T. F. (1997) ‘Phylogenies and the comparative method: a general approach to incorporating phylogenetic information into the analysis of interspecific data’, American Naturalist, 149, 646-667.
33. McArdle, B. and Rodrigo, A. G. (1994) ‘Estimating the ancestral states of a continuous-valued character using squared-change parsimony: an analytical solution’, Systematic Biology, 43, 573-578.
34. McCullagh, P. and Nelder, J. A. (1989) Generalized linear models, 2nd edn, London: CRC Press.
35. Richtsmeier, J. T., Cheverud, J. M. and Lele, S. (1992) ‘Advances in anthropological morphometrics’, Annual Review of Anthropololgy, 21, 283-305.
36. Richtsmeier, J. T., Cole, T. M. III, Valeri, C. J. and Lele, S. (1998) ‘Preoperative morphology and development in sagittal synostosis’, Journal of Craniofacial Genetics and Developmental Biology, 18, 64-78.
37. Richtsmeier, J. T. and Lele, S. (1993) ‘A coordinate free approach to the analysis of growth patterns: models and theoretical considerations’, Biological Reviews, 68, 381-411.
38. Rohlf, F. J. (1977) ‘Classification of Aedes mosquitoes using statistical methods’, Mosquito Systematics, 9, 372-388.
39. Rohlf, F. J. (1981) ‘Spatial representation of phylogenetic trees computed from dissimilarity matrices’, in Martinell, J. (ed.) International Symposium on Concepts and Method in Paleontology, Barcelona, Spain, Departament de Paleontologia, Univ. de Barcelona, pp. 303-311.
40. Rohlf, F. J. (1993) ‘Relative warp analysis and an example of its application to mosquito wings’, in Marcus, L. F., Bello, E. and Garcia-Valdecasas, A. (eds) Contributions to morphometrics, Madrid: Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, pp. 131-159.
41. Rohlf, F. J. (1996) ‘Morphometric spaces, shape components and the effects of linear transformations’, in Marcus, L. F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Naylor, G. J. P. and Slice, D. E. (eds) Advances in morphometrics, New York: Plenum, pp. 117-129.
42. Rohlf, F. J. (1998a) ‘On applications of geometric morphometrics to studies of ontogeny and phylogeny’, Systematic Biology, 47, 147-158.
43. Rohlf, F. J. (1998b) ‘tpsSmall: is shape variation small?, version 1.11', Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Online. Available .
44. Rohlf, F. J. (1999a) ‘Shape statistics: procrustes superimpositions and tangent spaces’, Journal of Classification, 16, 197-223.
45. Rohlf, F. J. (1999b) ‘tpsDig, version 1.18', Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Online. Available
46. Rohlf, F. J. (2000a) ‘On the use of shape spaces to compare morphometric methods’, Hystrix, 11, 9-25.
47. Rohlf, F. J. (2000b) ‘NTSYS-PC: numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system, version 2.02k’, Setauket: Exeter Software.
48. Rohlf, F. J. (2000c) ‘Statistical power comparisons among alternative morphometric methods’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 111, 463-478.
49. Rohlf, F. J. (2000d) ‘tpsSuper: superimposition, version 1.06', Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Online. Available
50. Rohlf, F. J. (2000e) ‘tpsTree: fitting shapes to trees, version 1.12', Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook.
51. Rohlf, F. J. (2001) ‘Comparative methods for the analysis of continuous variables: Geometric interpretations’, Evolution, 55, 2143-2160.
52. Rohlf, F. J. and Corti, M. (2000) ‘The use of partial least-squares to study covariation in shape’, Systematic Biology, 49, 740-753.
53. Rohlf, F. J. and Marcus, L. F. (1993) ‘A revolution in morphometrics’, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 8, 129-132.
54. Rohlf, F. J. and Slice, D. E. (1990) ‘Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks’, Systematic Zoology, 39, 40-59.
55. Small, C. G. (1996) The statistical theory of shape, New York: Springer.
56. Sneath, P. H. A. (1967) ‘Trend-surface analysis of transformation grids’, Journal of Zoology, London, 151, 65-122.
57. Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, F. J. (1995) Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research, 3rd edn, San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
58. Swiderski, D. L. (1993) ‘Morphological evolution of the scapula in the tree squirrels, chipmunks, and ground squirrels (Sciuridae): an analysis using thin-plate splines’, Evolution, 47, 1854-1873.
59. Zelditch, M. L., Bookstein, F. L. and Lundrigan, B. L. (1992) ‘Ontogeny of integrated skull growth in the cotton rat Sigmodon fulviventer’, Evolution, 46, 1164-1180.
60. Zelditch, M. L., Bookstein, F. L. and Lundrigan, B. L. (1993) ‘The ontogenetic complexity of developmental constraints’, Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 6, 121-141.
61. Zelditch, M. L. and Fink, W. L. (1995) ‘Allometry and developmental integration of body growth in a Piranha, Pygocentrus nattereri (Teleostei: Ostariophysi)', Journal of Morphology, 223, 341-355.
62. Zelditch, M. L., Fink, W. L. and Swiderski, D. L. (1995) ‘Morphometrics, homology, and phylogenetics: quantified characters as synapomorphies’, Systematic Biology, 44, 179-189.
63. Zelditch, M. L., Fink, W. L., Swiderski, D. L. and Lundrigan, B. L. (1998) ‘On applications of geometric morphometrics to studies of ontogeny and phylogeny: a reply to Rohlf’, Systematic Biology, 47, 159-167.