Hello All,
I was thinking about using TpsRelw to slide semilandmarks before analysing
the aligned specimens data in MorphoJ, but does it really make sense to
double the alignment?
Even if I have the file after TpsRelw, where landmarks and semilandmarks
are treated differently, im MorphoJ I make
I use tpsRelw for align my data and I din't have ID lost in my matrix.
Trait export the aligned file like a *tps. Respect to the size, I never
has been "residuals of size" in there, and I think that you have a
problem there, because the value should be "0" or nearly "0" (because
the size was
The point is simple: the variables called centroid size and log centroid
size in MorphoJ won't be the real size of the original structures if
they're imported without rescaling them.
They are, in my experience, about 1 and, regardless of the reason (which
I find less important), they're wrong.
Hi Pere,
there's plenty of work arounds this. I agree with Carmelo that the nts
format may be easier to edit manually, so that you can put back the
necessary labels.
HOWEVER, PLEASE BE CAREFUL because SIZE WILL BE MISSING from those data.
As most of the time you may want to analyse both size
Dear Pere,
there are various workarounds to that. For instance, one can convert
the original tps file to an nts file and then copy the line with the
labels from the original nts to the tps with aligned specimens. Another
option, which is useful when one has the names in the file names and
Hello All,
I am using TPSRelW to slide semilandmarks. Once I have the consensus, I use
Save aligned to export the aligned coordinates (including slid
semilandmarks) as a tps file, that I want to import into MorphoJ.
The problem is that the file that is exported has the IDs of the specimens
