-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: Slide method and RWs
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 10:20:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: F. James Rohlf <[email protected]>
Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Organization: Stony Brook University
To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>

That should be considered 'normal'. The tpsRelw program does not (yet)
eliminate the last few dimensions that correspond to variation along
the curves that should, in principle, have been eliminated by the
sliding process.

=========================
F. James Rohlf
Distinguished Professor, Stony Brook University
http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/ee/rohlf


-----Original Message-----
From: morphmet [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2009 11:26 AM
To: morphmet
Subject: Slide method and RWs



-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Slide method and RWs
Date:   Tue, 8 Sep 2009 07:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Teresa Militão <[email protected]>
To:     [email protected]



Hello, everybody!



I'm using the geometric morphometric analysis to know if there
are any
differences in beak's shape between two species. For determine
the
beak's shape I’m using 10 landmarks and 3 semilandmarks. However
I have
some doubts that I was wondering if you can help me:



1.      I'm using the TpsRelw to slide the semilandmarks, however
I
don't know which slide method is more appropriated to do it?



2.      After sliding the semilandmarks using the Chord - min d2
I had
23 RWs. Theoretically if I have 3 semilandmarks, the last 3 RW
should
explain 0% of the variance, right? However I have one (of theses
3 last
RWs) that explain 0,01%. Is it normal? Should I use this RW in
further
analysis?



Thank you very much.





Teresa


--
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

Reply via email to