Statistical models in morphometrics: Are they realistic?

Subhash Lele, Joan T. Richtsmeier

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

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 languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationSystematic Zoology
Pages60-69
Number of pages10
Volume39
Edition1
DOIs
StatePublished - 1990

Fingerprint

Statistical Models
statistical models
perturbation
Datasets
analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Genetics

Cite this

Lele, S., & Richtsmeier, J. T. (1990). Statistical models in morphometrics: Are they realistic? In Systematic Zoology (1 ed., Vol. 39, pp. 60-69) https://doi.org/10.2307/2992208

Statistical models in morphometrics : Are they realistic? / Lele, Subhash; Richtsmeier, Joan T.

Systematic Zoology. Vol. 39 1. ed. 1990. p. 60-69.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Lele, S & Richtsmeier, JT 1990, Statistical models in morphometrics: Are they realistic? in Systematic Zoology. 1 edn, vol. 39, pp. 60-69. https://doi.org/10.2307/2992208
Lele S, Richtsmeier JT. Statistical models in morphometrics: Are they realistic? In Systematic Zoology. 1 ed. Vol. 39. 1990. p. 60-69 https://doi.org/10.2307/2992208
Lele, Subhash ; Richtsmeier, Joan T. / Statistical models in morphometrics : Are they realistic?. Systematic Zoology. Vol. 39 1. ed. 1990. pp. 60-69
@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 -