What is the criteria you are using to define the species? Are you absolutely sure about the true identity of those overlapping clouds in morphospace? Most genera of small mammals I know show the same properties of overlapping clouds and "continuous distributions" in morphospace. The problem with using discriminant functions is that you MUST know the true identity of the groups in question before performing the analysis. The only way around this problem is, in most cases, having an additional dimension like the genetic identity of the samples. Perhaps, a complementary approach such as DNA barcoding methods would be the answer.
Pablo Jarrin Grad. Student. Dept. of Biology Boston University Quoting morphmet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Dear morphometricians, > > I have the following problem: > > I have performed a PCA of shape (relative warps analysis) on a set > of > mouse mandibles from animals of different geographic origins. Now in > a > plot of PC1 vs PC2, I can "see" that PC1 sorts specimens into > broadly > overlapping clusters corresponding to the respective origins of the > mice, while PC2 (and the other PCs) do not. The problem is now that > the > overlaps of the "population" clusters are rather broad so the > question > is how different they actually are. Also, I have several > "populations", > so it looks like a continuum of overlapping clouds. > Could you recommend a means to quantify and/or somehow test the > actual > differences between "populations" along PC1? > > Louis Boell > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Machen Sie Ihre E-Mail-Kontakte zu Messenger-Freunden! Einfacher > Adressimport! > <http://redirect.gimas.net/? cat=hmtl&n=M1007AI&d=http://messenger.live.de/ersteschritte_adressimport.html> > > -- > Replies will be sent to the list. > For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org > -- Replies will be sent to the list. For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org
