-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Variance explained by size
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 11:44:00 -0400
From: Dennis E. Slice <[email protected]>
To: morphmet <[email protected]>
Without looking at the specific example, it may be worth mentioning that
there are two issues size/shape relationships - isometric and
allometric. GPA removes isometric size variation, but there could still
be an association with size and shape. For instance, maybe all large
specimens were tall, skinny rectangles while all small ones were short,
fat rectangles. Size could, in such a case, "explain" 100% of "pure"
shape variation. -ds
On 8/26/11 5:29 PM, brian boivin wrote:
Hi,
In Geometrics morphometrics for Biologist : A Primer (pg7) it says:"In
the two species mentionned above (in which PC1 accounts for 99.4% of
the variance), SIZE explains 71% of the variance in SHAPE in one
species, but only 21.7% in the other."
I did not find any information in the book to explains the impact of
size on the variance in shape. Did I miss something?
How can one calculate the % of variance in shape explained by size?
Email:[email protected]
Thank you for your time
B.B
--
Dennis E. Slice
Associate Professor
Dept. of Scientific Computing
Florida State University
Dirac Science Library
Tallahassee, FL 32306-4120
-
Guest Professor
Department of Anthropology
University of Vienna
-
Software worth having/learning/using...
Linux (Operating System: Ubuntu, CentOS, openSUSE, etc.)
OpenOffice (Office Suite: http://www.openoffice.org/)
R package (Stats/Graphics environment: http://www.r-project.org/)
Eclipse (Java/C++/etc IDE: http://www.eclipse.org/)
Netbeans (Java/C++/etc IDE: http://netbeans.org/)
Zotero (FireFox bibliographic extension: http://www.zotero.org/)
========================================================
