-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Morphometrics of small, variable specimens--embryos]
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 11:57:24 -0400
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Re: Morphometrics of small, variable specimens--embryos
From:    "P. David Polly" <[email protected]>
Date:    Tue, March 29, 2011 9:42 am
To:      [email protected]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Eric,

I think you're on the right track with mounting the same specimen more than
once.  If you do every specimen two or three times you can partition out the
shape variation due to mis-alignment of the plane.  To do this you add an
additional level to your ANOVA so that it has factors for between group,
between individual, and between mount variation.  There are several papers
you can cite for this method, but my favourite is Baily and Byrnes, 1990. A
new, old method for assessing measurement error in both univariate and
multivariate morphometric studies.  Syst. Zool. 39: 124-130.

Best wishes,
David

-----------------------
Dr. P. David Polly
Department of Geological Sciences
Indiana University
1001 E. 10th Street
Bloomington, IN 47405  USA
[email protected]
+1 812 855 7994
http://mypage.iu.edu/~pdpolly/

(Adjunct in Biology and Anthropology)


----- Original Message -----
From: "morphmet" <[email protected]>
To: "morphmet" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 11:36 AM
Subject: Morphometrics of small, variable specimens--embryos




-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Morphometrics of small, variable specimens--embryos
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:28:14 -0400
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]

Hello all,

I am currently doing 2D and 3D analyses of midgestational mouse embryos.
My sample is variable owing to ontogenetic variation. Genetic variation is
very minimal, as my strains are mostly congenics, having practically
identical genetic backgrounds but differing only at one or two loci. The
specimens are also very small.

First, for the 2D analysis, I am photographing freshly harvested and
unfixed embryos in three different orientations (top, lateral, and
"frontal" = palatal view), mounting in a petri dish of cold saline and
photo'ing two separate times per view. Each set of images per specimen is
landmarked twice, and all the data will be subject to an initial
procrustes ANOVA to assess the relative strengths of the different effects
of mounting, landmarking, genotype, and specimen. However, I expect, and
experience shows, that a significant portion of the variance in the data
will be due to mounting errors. The embryos are small and difficult to
position. GPA will take care of rotational errors. But slight rotations
out of the plane (pitch and yaw) will produce variation in the data that
will look like shape variation. My hope is that by mounting and photo'ing
twice, I will reduce pitch/yaw errors.

Will the mean square of the mounting effect reflect the amount of those
types of errors?

If I can identify a PC that appears to capture pitch or yaw, can I regress
the procrustes coordinates on that PC in order to remove those errors from
the data?

Thanks.

Eric

[email protected]
University of Calgary
Faculty of Medicine











Reply via email to