Phylogenetic signals in morphometric data

Norman MacLeod
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203165171.ch7
2002-01-01
Abstract:Although many of the goals and concepts of qualitative morphological analysis and morphometrics are similar, systematists have largely rejected the use of morphometric methods in phylogenetic analysis on a variety of grounds. This review finds that (1) the concepts of a cladistic character and a morphometric vari- able are essentially identical, (2) morphometric methods can be instrumental in discovering and document- ing new morphological character and character states, (3) prior objections to the use of morphometric vari- ables because of their continuous nature confuse the issues of variable type with those surrounding the dis- tributions of sets of observations, (4) morphometrics offers the best method of determining whether mor- phological observations are discontinuous (= can be coded as discrete character states) or continuous (= can- not be coded as discrete character states), (5) constellations of landmark-based morphometric variables repre- sent adequate summaries of putative structure-level homologues for use in phylogenetic analyses, (6) partial warp analyses do not perform well in either simulated or actual phylogenetic systematic analyses because of their inherent instability and lack of adequate spatial localization, and (7) a new method of subdivided rela- tive warp analysis (described herein) performs very well at recognizing simulated morphological character states and recovering a simulated morphological phylogenetic hierarchy. Based on these results it is con- cluded that the potential of morphometric data analysis methods (especially relative warp-based methods) to contribute to phylogenetic-systematic investigations should be explored further.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?