Dear Morphometricians

I am new in geometric morphometrics. I have a question perhaps quite simple
with regards to 2D GM. I am comparing the size/shape of human skulls from
different sources using photographs taken in norma lateralis. One part was
obtained through a standardized protocol while the other part was obtained
from published pictures (with permissions) which were obtained using
different protocols. I have traditional measurements for each skull for the
published data set in order to compute the centroid size. However, taking
into account some theoretical issues I feel that such comparison may be
biased especially regarding size (i.e. CS) because both sets of images were
obtained using different distances between the camera and the target. In
order to minimize the size bias I plan to digitize landmarks and
semilandmarks only along the skull contour given that its shape can be
optimally characterized using a 2D approach. The location of landmarks in
other structures poorly characterized from the 2D approach (i.e distinct to
the contour) would increase the size bias. I will do a procrustes analysis
using both data sets and through a multivariate regression of size on the
procustes coordinates I will obtain residuals (i.e. shape variables). To my
knowledge using this approach I will minimize the size bias mentioned.
Obviously I will not use the centroid size in any subsequent analysis, only
the shape variables. Does anyone tell me if this approach is right? Some
thanks in advance


Este correo electrónico se ha enviado desde un equipo libre de virus y
protegido por Avast.

MORPHMET may be accessed via its webpage at
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"MORPHMET" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 

Reply via email to