Literature DB >> 29244247

2D or Not 2D? Testing the Utility of 2D Vs. 3D Landmark Data in Geometric Morphometrics of the Sculpin Subfamily Oligocottinae (Pisces; Cottoidea).

Thaddaeus J Buser1, Brian L Sidlauskas1, Adam P Summers2.   

Abstract

We contrast 2D vs. 3D landmark-based geometric morphometrics in the fish subfamily Oligocottinae by using 3D landmarks from CT-generated models and comparing the morphospace of the 3D landmarks to one based on 2D landmarks from images. The 2D and 3D shape variables capture common patterns across taxa, such that the pairwise Procrustes distances among taxa correspond and the trends captured by principal component analysis are similar in the xy plane. We use the two sets of landmarks to test several ecomorphological hypotheses from the literature. Both 2D and 3D data reject the hypothesis that head shape correlates significantly with the depth at which a species is commonly found. However, in taxa where shape variation in the z-axis is high, the 2D shape variables show sufficiently strong distortion to influence the outcome of the hypothesis tests regarding the relationship between mouth size and feeding ecology. Only the 3D data support previous studies which showed that large mouth sizes correlate positively with high percentages of elusive prey in the diet. When used to test for morphological divergence, 3D data show no evidence of divergence, while 2D data show that one clade of oligocottines has diverged from all others. This clade shows the greatest degree of z-axis body depth within Oligocottinae, and we conclude that the inability of the 2D approach to capture this lateral body depth causes the incongruence between 2D and 3D analyses. Anat Rec, 301:806-818, 2018.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D morphometrics; ecomorphology; geometric morphometrics; ichthyology; macroevolution

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29244247     DOI: 10.1002/ar.23752

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anat Rec (Hoboken)        ISSN: 1932-8486            Impact factor:   2.064


  17 in total

1.  Measurement error in μCT-based three-dimensional geometric morphometrics introduced by surface generation and landmark data acquisition.

Authors:  Karolin Engelkes; Jennice Helfsgott; Jörg U Hammel; Sebastian Büsse; Thomas Kleinteich; André Beerlink; Stanislav N Gorb; Alexander Haas
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 2.610

2.  Integration of skeletal traits in some passerines: impact (or the lack thereof) of body mass, phylogeny, diet and habitat.

Authors:  Oksana V Shatkovska; Maria Ghazali
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 2.610

Review 3.  Future Tail Tales: A Forward-Looking, Integrative Perspective on Tail Research.

Authors:  M J Schwaner; S T Hsieh; I Braasch; S Bradley; C B Campos; C E Collins; C M Donatelli; F E Fish; O E Fitch; B E Flammang; B E Jackson; A Jusufi; P J Mekdara; A Patel; B J Swalla; M Vickaryous; C P McGowan
Journal:  Integr Comp Biol       Date:  2021-09-08       Impact factor: 3.326

4.  Thyroid hormone shapes craniofacial bones during postembryonic zebrafish development.

Authors:  Stephanie Keer; Joshua D Storch; Stacy Nguyen; Mia Prado; Rajendra Singh; Luz Patricia Hernandez; Sarah K McMenamin
Journal:  Evol Dev       Date:  2022-03-25       Impact factor: 1.930

5.  Can morphotaxa be assessed with photographs? Estimating the accuracy of two-dimensional cranial geometric morphometrics for the study of threatened populations of African monkeys.

Authors:  Andrea Cardini; Yvonne A de Jong; Thomas M Butynski
Journal:  Anat Rec (Hoboken)       Date:  2021-11-02       Impact factor: 2.227

6.  Low resolution scans can provide a sufficiently accurate, cost- and time-effective alternative to high resolution scans for 3D shape analyses.

Authors:  Ariel E Marcy; Carmelo Fruciano; Matthew J Phillips; Karine Mardon; Vera Weisbecker
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 2.984

7.  High-performance suction feeding in an early elasmobranch.

Authors:  Michael I Coates; Kristen Tietjen; Aaron M Olsen; John A Finarelli
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 14.136

8.  Scan, extract, wrap, compute-a 3D method to analyse morphological shape differences.

Authors:  Martin Horstmann; Alexander T Topham; Petra Stamm; Sebastian Kruppert; John K Colbourne; Ralph Tollrian; Linda C Weiss
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-06-08       Impact factor: 2.984

9.  A new, three-dimensional geometric morphometric approach to assess egg shape.

Authors:  Marie R G Attard; Emma Sherratt; Paul McDonald; Iain Young; Marta Vidal-García; Stephen Wroe
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 2.984

10.  Developmental tuning of mineralization drives morphological diversity of gill cover bones in sculpins and their relatives.

Authors:  Eli G Cytrynbaum; Clayton M Small; Ronald Y Kwon; Boaz Hung; Danny Kent; Yi-Lin Yan; Matthew L Knope; Ruth A Bremiller; Thomas Desvignes; Charles B Kimmel
Journal:  Evol Lett       Date:  2019-07-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.