2013
DOI: 10.2478/jas-2013-0028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Landmark-Based Morphometric Study in the Fore and Hind Wings of an Iranian Race of European Honeybee (Apis mellifera meda)

Abstract: a b s t r a c t honeybee (Apis mellifera ) populations are usually distinguished using standard morphometric methods, mainly based on multivariate analysis of distances and angles. recently, geometric morphometrics, another method of statistical analysis of shape, has been developed. this research was conducted on european honeybees in iran in 2012. multivariate analysis on hind wings identified significant differences between honeybee populations from different areas and significant differences in centroid si… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
(20 reference statements)
1
8
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, Oleksa and Tofilski (2015) reported that in some studies, morphometrics proved to be even more effective in the identification of subspecies than molecular markers, and that the morphological characters were also more suitable for distinguishing ecotypes within A. mellifera subspecies. In contrast, Dolati et al (2013) reported that for A. m. meda colonies of many Iranian populations only 68.2% were correctly classified by using the FW shape and 43% by using the HW shape. Our analysis of the HW venation also showed an important shift in the position of the 1 st , 2 nd and 7 th landmark.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, Oleksa and Tofilski (2015) reported that in some studies, morphometrics proved to be even more effective in the identification of subspecies than molecular markers, and that the morphological characters were also more suitable for distinguishing ecotypes within A. mellifera subspecies. In contrast, Dolati et al (2013) reported that for A. m. meda colonies of many Iranian populations only 68.2% were correctly classified by using the FW shape and 43% by using the HW shape. Our analysis of the HW venation also showed an important shift in the position of the 1 st , 2 nd and 7 th landmark.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…All the LM correspond to type I LM sensu Bookstein (1991) except for LM15 on FW (maximum curvature of veins, a type III LM). The same set or a slightly reduced set of LMs has been employed in most GPA studies of honeybees (Baylac et al 2008, Miguel et al 2011, Barour et al 2011Kandemir et al 2011, Oleksa andTofilski 2015), but other authors have also used HW shape data from the A. m. intermissa and A. m. sahariensis populations (Barour, 2012) and from A. mellifera subspecies (Dolati et al 2013). …”
Section: Data Acquisitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Later, Adl et al (2007) confirmed the clear separation between west Iranian A. m. meda, east Anatolian A. m. anatoliaca and A. m. caucasica. Dolati et al (2013) further differentiated Iranian A. m. meda into 9 subpopulation by geometric wing analysis. All these investigations were based on morphometry, but were recently supplemented by a few molecular studies, mostly restricted to partial areas (Kandemir et al 2004, Rahini 2015.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This work was later supplemented by Ftayeh et al (1994), who clarified the distribution limit into northern Syria, and by Ruttner et al (2000) showing altitude-related clinal variation pattern along the 36°N latitude up ad down the Elbrus Mountains to the Caspian sea. Later, Adl et al (2007) Dolati et al (2013) further differentiated Iranian A. m. meda into 9 subpopulation by geometric wing analysis. All these investigations were based on morphometry, but were recently supplemented by a few molecular studies, mostly restricted to partial areas (Kandemir et al 2004, Rahini 2015.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…developed the DrawWing open software, able to automatically determine coordinates of eighteen wing landmarks, which was claimed to reduce the analysis time and to improve precision in the identification of vein junctions. Nonetheless, in most articles on this subject, tpsDig software has remained the most popular choice (Charistos, Hatjina, Bouga, Mladenovic, & Maistros, 2014;Dolati, Rafie, & Khalesro, 2013;Francoy, Grassi, Imperatriz-Fonseca, de Jesús May-Itzá, & Quezada-Euán, 2011;Francoy et al, 2008;Francoy et al, 2009;Rasic, Mladenovic, & Stanisavljevic, 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%