Evaluating modularity in morphometric data: challenges with the RV coefficient and a new test measure

被引:197
作者
Adams, Dean C. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Iowa State Univ, Dept Ecol Evolut & Organismal Biol, Ames, IA 50011 USA
[2] Iowa State Univ, Dept Stat, Ames, IA 50011 USA
来源
METHODS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION | 2016年 / 7卷 / 05期
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
geometric morphometrics; modularity; morphological integration; trait covariation; MORPHOLOGICAL INTEGRATION; PHENOTYPIC INTEGRATION; DEVELOPMENTAL INTEGRATION; EVOLUTIONARY INTEGRATION; PHYLOGENETIC SIGNAL; SHAPE; MOUSE; DIVERSIFICATION; ORGANIZATION; DIVERGENCE;
D O I
10.1111/2041-210X.12511
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
1. Modularity describes the case where patterns of trait covariation are unevenly dispersed across traits. Specifically, trait correlations are high and concentrated within subsets of variables (modules), but the correlations between traits across modules are relatively weaker. For morphometric data sets, hypotheses of modularity are commonly evaluated using the RV coefficient, an association statistic used in a wide variety of fields. 2. In this article, I explore the properties of the RV coefficient using simulated data sets. Using data drawn from a normal distribution where the data were neither modular nor integrated in structure, I show that the RV coefficient is adversely affected by attributes of the data (sample size and the number of variables) that do not characterize the covariance structure between sets of variables. Thus, with the RV coefficient, patterns of modularity or integration in data are confounded with trends generated by sample size and the number of variables, which limits biological interpretations and renders comparisons of RV coefficients across data sets uninformative. 3. As an alternative, I propose the covariance ratio (CR) for quantifying modular structure and show that it is unaffected by sample size or the number of variables. Further, statistical tests based on the CR exhibit appropriate type I error rates and display higher statistical power relative to the RV coefficient when evaluating modular data. 4. Overall, these findings demonstrate that the RV coefficient does not display statistical characteristics suitable for reliable assessment of hypotheses of modular or integrated structure and therefore should not be used to evaluate these patterns in morphological data sets. By contrast, the covariance ratio meets these criteria and provides a useful alternative method for assessing the degree of modular structure in morphological data.
引用
收藏
页码:565 / 572
页数:8
相关论文
共 72 条
[11]   geomorph: an r package for the collection and analysis of geometric morphometric shape data [J].
Adams, Dean C. ;
Otarola-Castillo, Erik .
METHODS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2013, 4 (04) :393-399
[12]   Comparing Evolutionary Rates for Different Phenotypic Traits on a Phylogeny Using Likelihood [J].
Adams, Dean C. .
SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY, 2013, 62 (02) :181-192
[13]   Parallel evolution of character displacement driven by competitive selection in terrestrial salamanders [J].
Adams, Dean C. .
BMC EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY, 2010, 10
[14]   A MODEL FOR DEVELOPMENT AND EVOLUTION OF COMPLEX MORPHOLOGICAL STRUCTURES [J].
ATCHLEY, WR ;
HALL, BK .
BIOLOGICAL REVIEWS, 1991, 66 (02) :101-157
[15]  
Bookstein F. L., 1991, MORPHOMETRIC TOOLS L
[16]   Cranial integration in Homo:: singular warps analysis of the midsagittal plane in ontogeny and evolution [J].
Bookstein, FL ;
Gunz, P ;
Mitteroecker, P ;
Prossinger, H ;
Schæfer, K ;
Seidler, H .
JOURNAL OF HUMAN EVOLUTION, 2003, 44 (02) :167-187
[17]   Integration, Disintegration, and Self-Similarity: Characterizing the Scales of Shape Variation in Landmark Data [J].
Bookstein, Fred L. .
EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY, 2015, 42 (04) :395-426
[18]  
Burnham K. P., 2002, A practical information-theoretic approach: model selection and multimodel inference
[19]  
CHEVERUD JM, 1982, EVOLUTION, V36, P499, DOI 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1982.tb05070.x
[20]  
Cheverud JM, 1996, AM ZOOL, V36, P44