On applications of geometric morphometrics to studies of ontogeny and phylogeny.
On applications of geometric morphometrics to studies of ontogeny and phylogeny.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/106351598261094
复制
发表时间：
1998-03
影响因子：
6.5
通讯作者：
F. Rohlf;D. Cannatella
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
F. Rohlf;D. Cannatella
几何形态计量学是一个相对较新的领域（见Bookstein， 1991, Rohlf and Marcus, 1993），在过去几年中取得了非常迅速的进展。正如在快速发展时期所预料的那样，在生物学家试图应用新工具的过程中，一些开创性的研究可能会出现技术问题。为了对真实数据集进行全面的分析，这些新技术应该如何结合起来，现在才变得清晰起来。Bookstein （1996b）给出了这类应用的建议列表，Bookstein （1996a）给出了几个形态计量学分析的综合例子。然而，这些描述并没有解决系统生物学中特别感兴趣的一些应用类型。Bookstein（1994）指出了在通常的基于特征的分支学研究中使用几何形态计量学方法的问题。他强调形态计量学不能提供同源的形状特征。本文的目的是评述形态计量学方法在系统生物学中的一些最新应用。本文特别关注Zelditch等人使用的形态计量学方法。Burke等人（1996）也采用了这些方法。为方便起见，这些研究将使用首字母缩略词Z&F来指代。在这些研究中，作者调查了部分翘曲的使用（Bookstein, 1991）作为个体发生和分类学研究中的变量。他们的观察结果给他们留下了深刻的印象，即部分经度分数的差异（Rohlf, 1993b）与生物体内可能存在的形状差异相对应。他们还发现这些变量在不同的发育阶段和不同的物种之间存在差异。他们的结论是，部分翘曲可以作为传统的分类特征来解释和使用，并且在进化研究中很有用。Lynch et al.（1996）试图解释他们在研究中获得的部分翘曲，但他们对以Z&F提倡的方式使用它们持谨慎态度。他们建议需要进行广泛的模拟研究来验证Z&F方法。Naylor（1996）使用基于模拟系统发育的数据研究了他们的方法。尽管他的模拟系统发育是基于一系列简单的形态变化，没有同源性，但结果显示了高度的同源性，并没有恢复用于创建系统发育的形态变化。本文关注的是理论问题，而不是需要通过模拟验证的经验问题。最根本的问题是Z&F…
In press − − do not cite 2 The field of geometric morphometrics is relatively new (see Bookstein, 1991, Rohlf and Marcus, 1993) and has shown very rapid progress over the last few years. As might be expected during a period of rapid development, there can be technical problems in some of the pioneering studies as biologists attempt to apply the new tools. It is only now becoming clear how the new techniques should be combined in order to carry out comprehensive analyses of real datasets. Bookstein (1996b) gave a list of recommendations for such applications and Bookstein (1996a) gave several comprehensive examples of morphometric analyses. However, these accounts do not address some of the types of applications that are of particular interest in systematic biology. Bookstein (1994) pointed out problems with using geometric morphometric methods in the usual character-based cladistic studies. He emphasized that morphometrics cannot supply homologous shape characters. The purpose of this note is to comment some recent applications of morphometric methods in systematic biology. This note is particularly concerned with the morphometric methods used by Zelditch et al. These methods were also used by Burke et al. (1996). For convenience, these studies will be referred to using the acronym Z&F. In these studies the authors investigated the use of partial warps (Bookstein, 1991) as variables in ontogenetic and taxonomic studies. They were impressed by their observation that differences in partial warps scores (Rohlf, 1993b) corresponded to shape differences that could be localized on the bodies of the organisms. They also found differences in these variables between developmental stages and between species. They concluded that partial warps could be interpreted and used as traditional taxonomic characters and would be useful in evolutionary studies. Lynch et al. (1996) tried to interpret the partial warps they obtained in their study but they were cautious about using them in the ways advocated by Z&F. They suggested that extensive simulation studies needed to be done to validate the Z&F approach. Naylor (1996) investigated their approach using data based on a simulated phylogeny. Even though his simulated phylogeny was based on a sequence of simple morphological changes and had no homoplasy, the results showed high levels of homoplasy and did not recover the morphological changes used to create the phylogeny. The present paper is concerned with theoretical problems rather than empirical problems requiring validation through simulations. The fundamental problem is that Z&F …