Abstract:The greatest strength of the new geometric morphometrics is the system of interrelated multivariate and graphical procedures it offers for a variety of analytic questions involving landmark data. A typical analysis will begin with the conversion of landmark data into a multivariate statistical representation of shape, will continue with a series of broadly familiar multivariate matrix manipulations, and will conclude by inspection of a considerable variety of diagrams that represent the findings in both the space of shape coordinates per se and the space of the two-or three-dimensional image of the organism. The choices under the first heading, the passage to a multivariate representation of shape, include two-point shape coordinates, partial warp scores, and Procrustes residuals. Each of these except the partial warp scores is unsuitable for some subset of the reasonable matrix manipulations; for instance, shape coordinates do not supply sensible principal components analyses, and Procrustes residuals cannot lead to sound canonical variate analyses without modification. The modes of diagramming data include thin-plate splines, partial warp splines and scatters, Procrustes residual scatters, and resistant-fit scatters, among others. Most analyses benefit greatly from exploiting more than one of these.Not every combination of shape coordinates, multivariate maneuvers, and diagram styles makes sense. Underlying the multivariate geometry of any sample is an a-priori Procrustes geometry of shape per se, and the three parts of any analysis must be mutually consistent in the use they make of this geometry as well as the usual linear geometry of multivariate analysis. Some formal structures serve two roles in this synthesis; for instance, the affine term of a generalized affine least-squares fit is equivalent to the uniform component of the relation between a specimen shape and the sample mean. Within the realm of multivariate computations per se, some analyses are automatically equivalent: for instance, relative warps analysis with α = −1 is a principal coordinates analysis of bending energy. Familiar statistical tests (e.g. two-sample comparisons by Hotelling’s T2) come in several approximate versions for sample sizes smaller than those for which the standard procedure is appropriate. Some combinations are usually inappropriate; for instance, resistant-fit residuals are not shape coordinates and should not be used as input for any linear multivariate computation. And interpretation of certain computations requires the prior inspection of others; for instance, any relative warps analysis of the nonaffine space should be preceded by analysis of the full shape space. There are modifications of all the basic tools for applications to symmetric forms, and all come in one version for two-dimensional data and a different version for three-dimensional data.This chapter explains the entire toolkit in terms of the logic by which diverse choices are combined into complete analyses that circumvent a variety of popular pitfalls.

INTRODUCTION OF MORPHOMETRICS AND A CASE STUDY ON FUSULINID FORAMINIFERA

Quantification methodologies on organization and morphology features of fiber-like structures: A review

The Effect of Dominant Geometric Themes on Morphometric Analyses (with Special Reference to Coiled Cephalopods)

QUANTITATIVE METHODS IN MORPHOMETRIC STUDY OF EARLY LIFE

Morphometric Analysis of Two Eocene Related Radiolarian Species of the Podocyrtis (lampterium) Lineage

LANDMARKS, LOCALIZATION AND THE USE OF MORPHOMETRICS IN PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS

Identification of Life-History Stages in Fusulinid Foraminifera

Can fractal dimensions objectivize gastropod shell morphometrics? A case study from Lake Lugu (SW China)

New Insights for Ancient Foraminifera Through 3D Visuals of Fusulinids

Geometric morphometrics and geological shape-classification systems

Landmark methods for forms without landmarks: morphometrics of group differences in outline shape

Toward integration of geometric morphometrics and computational biomechanics: new methods for 3D virtual reconstruction and quantitative analysis of Finite Element Models

3D Shape and Morphology Characterization of Sediment Particles

Classifying Organisms and Artefacts By Their Shapes

Combining the Tools of Geometric Morphometrics

Is geometric morphometrics efficient for comparing otolith shape of different fish species?

APPLICATION OF THIN-PLATE SPLINE TRANSFORMATIONS TO FINITE ELEMENT MODELS, OR, HOW TO TURN A BOG TURTLE INTO A SPOTTED TURTLE TO ANALYZE BOTH

Alternative 2D and 3D Form Characterization Approaches to the Automated Identification of Biological Species

Geometric morphometrics: Ten years of progress following the ‘revolution’

Morphometric Characterisation of Landform from DEMs

New Insights into Geometric Morphometry Applied to Fish Scales for Species Identification