Publication | Closed Access
Assessment of Lineal Versus Landmark-Based Morphometry for Discriminating Species of Mugilidae (Actinopterygii)
21
Citations
34
References
2012
Year
Zoological TaxonomyAnatomyPhylogeneticsMolecular EcologyBiogeographyMammalogyBiostatisticsPrincipal Component AnalysisMeristic DataMorphological EvidenceBiodiversityAllometric StudyMorphologyMorphogenesisMorphological AnalysisM. CuremaBiologyPattern FormationBody SizeNatural SciencesEvolutionary BiologyZoogeographyCladisticsMedicine
Meristic and different morphometric approaches were employed to assess the discrimination of 7 species of Mugilidae fishes (Mugil cephalus, M. liza, M. curema, M. hospes, Liza aurata, L. ramada, and Chelon labrosus), but also to contribute to a better understanding of body-shape differences among this valuable species group. Three types of variables and their corresponding morphometric approaches were employed: 1) linear morphometrics measurements (LMMs); 2) interlandmark distances (IlDs); and 3) coordinate data (landmarks). Before the analyses, data exhibiting allometric growth were normalized. Data analysis included a one-way ANOVA (meristic data), a principal component analysis (PCA), and a cross-validated discriminant analysis (DA). The ANOVA showed significant differences in both lateral and transverse series scales. The PCA based on LMMs allowed the characterization of 6 groups, although some overlap between them was detected. The DA correctly classified 68.4% of the fishes according to their LMMs. The centroids of the 8 groups were separated for both the 1st and 2nd discriminant functions. The morphometric analysis based on IlDs yielded the best discrimination rates of the 3 approaches employed (96% for the DA). In the geometric morphometric analysis, the DA correctly classified 83.8% of the fishes according to their body shape. Although 8 groups were defined, some overlap among samples was detected. Mugil hospes was the best defined and most isolated species as observed in both the PCA and DA. Interestingly, the 3 morphometrics approaches employed separated M. curema specimens in 2 groups (Argentinean and Mexican samples). Moreover, European and Mexican samples of M. cephalus plotted separately in the PCA of the LMM- and IlD-based approaches. These shape differences among M. curema of Argentina/Mexico and M. cephalus of Europe/Mexico reinforce the current hypothesis of a species complex, or even undescribed species as previously suggested by the authors.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1