Statistical models in morphometrics: Are they realistic?

Subhash Lele; Joan T. Richtsmeier

doi:10.2307/2992208

Statistical models in morphometrics: Are they realistic?

Subhash Lele, Joan T. Richtsmeier

School of Medicine

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

31 Scopus citations

Abstract

This analysis considers the validity of the assumptions of the Gaussian perturbation model as applied to landmark data collected for morphometric analyses. The primary conclusion is that the assumption of homoscedasticity is unrealistic when applied to biological data sets. We also point out some important difficulties associated with alternate models.

Original language	English (US)
Title of host publication	Systematic Zoology
Pages	60-69
Number of pages	10
Volume	39
Edition	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.2307/2992208
State	Published - 1990

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Genetics

Access to Document

10.2307/2992208

Cite this

@inbook{44e0d9bc4b4a4149bebd4971aa8c65b0,

title = "Statistical models in morphometrics: Are they realistic?",

abstract = "This analysis considers the validity of the assumptions of the Gaussian perturbation model as applied to landmark data collected for morphometric analyses. The primary conclusion is that the assumption of homoscedasticity is unrealistic when applied to biological data sets. We also point out some important difficulties associated with alternate models.",

author = "Subhash Lele and Richtsmeier, {Joan T.}",

year = "1990",

doi = "10.2307/2992208",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "39",

pages = "60--69",

booktitle = "Systematic Zoology",

edition = "1",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Statistical models in morphometrics

T2 - Are they realistic?

AU - Lele, Subhash

AU - Richtsmeier, Joan T.

PY - 1990

Y1 - 1990

N2 - This analysis considers the validity of the assumptions of the Gaussian perturbation model as applied to landmark data collected for morphometric analyses. The primary conclusion is that the assumption of homoscedasticity is unrealistic when applied to biological data sets. We also point out some important difficulties associated with alternate models.

AB - This analysis considers the validity of the assumptions of the Gaussian perturbation model as applied to landmark data collected for morphometric analyses. The primary conclusion is that the assumption of homoscedasticity is unrealistic when applied to biological data sets. We also point out some important difficulties associated with alternate models.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0002505663&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0002505663&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2307/2992208

DO - 10.2307/2992208

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:0002505663

VL - 39

SP - 60

EP - 69

BT - Systematic Zoology

ER -

Statistical models in morphometrics: Are they realistic?

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this