Hi Andrea,

Thank you for the paper. Will be useful. 

Kind regards,
Helmi

On Monday, March 1, 2021 at 11:49:51 PM UTC+8 [email protected] wrote:

> Dear All, 
> this is out now: 
> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11692-021-09531-3 
>
> On the Misidentification of Species: Sampling Error in Primates and 
> Other Mammals Using Geometric Morphometrics in More Than 4000 Individuals 
> Andrea Cardini, Sarah Elton, Kris Kovarovic, Una Strand Viđarsdóttir & 
> P. David Polly - Evolutionary Biology (2021) 
>
> The abstract is below. 
> For a couple of days, I'll leave a pdf copy at 
> https://tinyurl.com/speciesmisid 
>
> The focus is morphospecies in living mammals but has potential 
> implications beyond that (especially in palaeo). 
> Cheers 
>
> Andrea 
>
>
> On the Misidentification of Species: Sampling Error in Primates and 
> Other Mammals Using Geometric Morphometrics in More Than 4000 Individual 
> Abstract 
> An accurate classification is the basis for research in biology. 
> Morphometrics and morphospecies play an important role in modern 
> taxonomy, with geometric morphometrics increasingly applied as a 
> favourite analytical tool. Yet, really large samples are seldom 
> available for modern species and even less common in palaeontology, 
> where morphospecies are often identified, described and compared using 
> just one or a very few specimens. The impact of sampling error and how 
> large a sample must be to mitigate the inaccuracy are important 
> questions for morphometrics and taxonomy. Using more than 4000 crania of 
> adult mammals and taxa representing each of the four placental 
> superorders, we assess the impacts of sampling error on estimates of 
> species means, variances and covariances in Procrustes shape data using 
> resampling experiments. In each group of closely related species (mostly 
> congeneric), we found that a species can be identified fairly accurately 
> even when means are based on relatively small samples, although errors 
> are frequent with fewer specimens and primates more prone to 
> inaccuracies. A precise reconstruction of similarity relationships, in 
> contrast, sometimes requires very large samples (> 100), but this varies 
> widely depending on the study group. Medium-sized samples are necessary 
> to accurately estimate standard errors of mean shapes or intraspecific 
> variance covariance structure, but in this case minimum sample sizes are 
> broadly similar across all groups (≈ 20–50 individuals). Overall, thus, 
> the minimum sample sized required for a study varies across taxa and 
> depends on what is being assessed, but about 25–40 specimens (for each 
> sex, if a species is sexually dimorphic) may be on average an adequate 
> and attainable minimum sample size for estimating the most commonly used 
> shape parameters. As expected, the best predictor of the effects of 
> sampling error is the ratio of between- to within-species variation: the 
> larger the ratio, the smaller the sample size needed to obtain the same 
> level of accuracy. Even though ours is the largest study to date of the 
> uncertainties in estimates of means, variances and covariances in 
> geometric morphometrics, and despite its generally high congruence with 
> previous analyses, we feel it would be premature to generalize. Clearly, 
> there is no a priori answer for what minimum sample size is required for 
> a particular study and no universal recipe to control for sampling 
> error. Exploratory analyses using resampling experiments are thus 
> desirable, easy to perform and yield powerful preliminary clues about 
> the effect of sampling on parameter estimates in comparative studies of 
> morphospecies, and in a variety of other morphometric applications in 
> biology and medicine. Morphospecies descriptions are indeed a small 
> piece of provisional evidence in a much more complex evolutionary 
> puzzle. However, they are crucial in palaeontology, and provide 
> important complimentary evidence in modern integrative taxonomy. Thus, 
> if taxonomy provides the bricks for accurate research in biology, 
> understanding the robustness of these bricks is the first fundamental 
> step to build scientific knowledge on sound, stable and long-lasting 
> foundations. 
>
>
>
> -- 
> Dr. Andrea Cardini 
> Researcher, Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e Geologiche, Università di 
> Modena e Reggio Emilia, Via Campi, 103 - 41125 Modena - Italy 
> tel. 0039 059 4223140 
>
> Adjunct Associate Professor, Centre for Forensic Anthropology, The 
> University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley WA 6009, 
> Australia 
>
> E-mail address: [email protected], [email protected] 
> WEBPAGE: https://sites.google.com/view/alcardini2/ 
> or https://tinyurl.com/andreacardini 
>
> FREE Yellow BOOK on Geometric Morphometrics: 
> https://tinyurl.com/yellowmorphobook 
>
> ESTIMATE YOUR GLOBAL FOOTPRINT: 
> http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/calculators/ 
> SUPPORT: secondwarning.org 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Morphmet" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/morphmet2/0031b16b-bbb6-433e-8956-74c71c113964n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to