Phylogenetic morphometrics (I): the use of landmark data in a phylogenetic framework

Catalano, Santiago A.; Goloboff, Pablo A.; Giannini, Norberto P.

doi:10.1111/j.1096-0031.2010.00302.x

Cited by 112 publications

(171 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

158

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2005, Goloboff et al 2006, González-José et al 2008, de Bivort et al 2010. Más recientemente, Catalano et al (2010) han desarrollado algoritmos para realizar análisis cladísticos a partir de la inclusión directa sin codificación de las coordenadas x, y (y 3D) de especímenes alineados.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Morfometría geométrica y filogenia en Rhodniini (Hemiptera, Reduviidae) de Venezuela

Soto-Vivas¹,

Liria

Luna

2011

AZM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 2011. Morfometría geométrica y filogenia en Rhodniini (Hemiptera, Reduviidae) de Venezuela. Acta Zool. Mex. (n. s.), 27(1): 87-102. RESUMEN. La tribu Rhodniini incluye los géneros Rhodnius Stål y Psammolestes Bergroth. Evidencias enzimática y molecular sugieren la monofilia de la tribu. La mayoría de las especies son selváticas encontrándose en palmas y en nidos de aves. Tradicionalmente ambos géneros fueron considerados grupos relacionados; no obstante, estudios moleculares cuestionan la monofilia de Rhodnius. El objetivo fue analizar filogenéticamente la variación morfométrica en la arquitectura alar, como apoyo a la taxonomía y sistemática en Rhodniini. Se fotografiaron 524 alas de cinco representantes de Rhodniini: Psammolestes arthuri (Pinto) (n = 89), Rhodnius pictipes Stål, (n = 21), R. robustus Larrousse (n = 24), R. prolixus Stål, (n = 16) y R. neivai Lent (n = 22). Como grupos externos se estudiaron cuatro representantes de Triatomini: Eratyrus mucronatus Stål (n = 15), Panstrongylus rufotuberculatus (Champion) (n = 45), P. geniculatus (Latreille) (n = 183) y Triatoma maculata (Erichson) (n = 109). Se registraron configuraciones de coordenadas (x, y) y se alinearon mediante Análisis Generalizado de Procrustes. Se efectuaron Análisis de Covarianza con proporción de grupos re-clasificados y MANOVA. Luego, las variables de la forma alar (intervalos de confianza de las deformaciones relativas) y el tamaño del centroide se analizaron cladísticamente. Los análisis estadísticos de varianza no encontraron diferencias significativas (Kruskal-Wallis) en el tamaño isométrico del ala en las especies P. arthuri -R. neivai -R. pictipes; R. robustus -R. prolixus -T. maculata y entre P. rufotuberculatus -P. geniculatus. La reclasificación a posteriori fue perfecta para E. mucrunatus 100% y R. pictipes, seguidas de T. maculata con 96%, R. neivai 95%, P arthuri 93.2%; R. prolixus 87.5%, P. geniculatus 87.4%, P. rufotuberculatus 84.4%, y R. robustus 76%. Los análisis cladísticos con parsimonia seleccionaron dos árboles de mínima longitud (L = 4.461 IC = 0.973 e IR = 0.979). El consenso estricto muestra la monofilia de Panstrongylus (rufotuberculatus + geniculatus) y Triatoma + Rhodniini (Rhodinus + Psammolestes), pero internamente la parafilia de Rhodnius respecto a Psammolestes. Estos resultados son congruentes con análisis molecu-

show abstract

Section: Introductionunclassified

Morfometría geométrica y filogenia en Rhodniini (Hemiptera, Reduviidae) de Venezuela

Soto-Vivas¹,

Liria

Luna

2011

AZM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because GM deals with coordinate data as opposed to the interlandmark distances of standard morphometrics, it allows patterns of variation in shape to be easily visualized (Bookstein 1991;Zelditch et al 2004;Slice 2007). Certain kinds of GM data can be used under a parsimony framework (Catalano et al 2010;Goloboff and Catalano 2011;Catalano and Goloboff 2012), and we see this as a promising new avenue of research. However, as with any phylogenetic analysis, taxon construction remains a fundamental issue.…”

Section: Geometric Morphometricsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Design Space and Cultural Transmission: Case Studies from Paleoindian Eastern North America

O’Brien

Boulanger

Buchanan

et al. 2015

J Archaeol Method Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tool design is a cultural trait-a term long used in anthropology as a unit of transmittable information that encodes particular behavioral characteristics of individuals or groups. After they are transmitted, cultural traits serve as units of replication in that they can be modified as part of a cultural repertoire through processes such as recombination, loss, or partial alteration. Artifacts and other components of the archaeological record serve as proxies for studying the transmission (and modification) of cultural traits, provided there is analytical clarity in defining and measuring whatever it is that is being transmitted. Our interest here is in tool design, and we illustrate how to create analytical units that allow us to map tool-design space and to begin to understand how that space was used at different points in time. We first introduce the concept of fitness landscape and impose a model of cultural learning over it, then turn to four methods that are useful for the analysis of design space: paradigmatic classification, phylogenetic analysis, distance graphs, and geometric morphometrics. Each method builds on the others in logical fashion, which allows creation of testable hypotheses concerning cultural transmission and the evolutionary processes that shape it, including invention (mutation), selection, and drift. For examples, we turn to several case studies J Archaeol Method Theory

show abstract

“…The use and importance of quantitative characters for phylogenetic inference is still under debate (Catalano et al 2010;Klingenberg and Gidaszewski 2010). Considering the species analyzed here, according to a phylogenetic hypothesis based on molecular markers, E. imperialis is placed in the most basal lineage within the piliventris species group (Ramírez et al 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated landmark and outline-based morphometric methods efficiently distinguish species of Euglossa (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Euglossini)

Francoy¹,

Franco²,

Roubik³

2012

Apidologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Morphometric methods permit identification of insect species and are an aid for taxonomy. Quantitative wing traits were used to identify male euglossine bees. Landmark-and outline-based methods have been primarily used independently. Here, we combine the two methods using five Euglossa. Landmark-based methods correctly classified 84% and outline-based 77%, but an integrated analysis correctly classified 91% of samples. Some species presented significantly high reclassification percentages when only wing cell contour was considered, and correct identification of specimens with damaged wings was also obtained using this methodology.euglossine bees / species identification / morphometrics / wings / quantitative traits

show abstract

Phylogenetic morphometrics (I): the use of landmark data in a phylogenetic framework

Cited by 112 publications

References 46 publications

Morfometría geométrica y filogenia en Rhodniini (Hemiptera, Reduviidae) de Venezuela

Morfometría geométrica y filogenia en Rhodniini (Hemiptera, Reduviidae) de Venezuela

Design Space and Cultural Transmission: Case Studies from Paleoindian Eastern North America

Integrated landmark and outline-based morphometric methods efficiently distinguish species of Euglossa (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Euglossini)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About