-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        CVA and PCA
Date:   Thu, 4 Sep 2008 03:27:22 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Guillaume COLOMBEAU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:     [email protected]



Dear Morphometricians


I have a problem with PCA and CVA interpretations. My study deals with
heterogeneous samples of Canis specimens described with cranial 3D
landmarks.
I did a PCA on procruste coordinates, then a CVA on coordinates in the
tangent space.

As example, this is a similar case to the study of P. Gunz & K. Harvati,
2007, JHE (Neanderthal 'chignon') : the number of modern individuals
represents 60 to 70% of the total corpus.

I understand the words of James Rohlf (in the 'Two group CVA plot' topic)
that explains that CVA = PCA in standardized space, and that CVA
computed on
all PCs is a rigid rotation (in 'CVA and MANOVA'). That's why now I doubt:

I did a CVA (with PCs summing 95% of the total variance) to evaluate the
strengh of within-group variances on the calculation of the PCs. As in
Gunz &
Harvati 2007, scatterplots from PCA and CVA are similar, showing a rotation
and a better segregation on CVA plot. How can one 'read' the strengh of
within-group variances and then correctly read the PCA results?


Thank you for your help

Best regards

guillaume

--
Guillaume Colombeau
PACEA-IPGQ/UMR 5199 du CNRS
Avenue des Facultés
Bâtiment de géologie B 18
33405 - Talence Cedex

--
Replies will be sent to the list.
For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org

Reply via email to