Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Examining the Efficiency of Models Using Tangent Coordinates or Principal Component Scores in Allometry Studies

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Most of the studies in medical and biological sciences are related to the examination of geometrical properties of an organ or organism. Growth and allometry studies are important in the way of investigating the effects of diseases and the environmental factors effects on the structure of the organ or organism. Thus, statistical shape analysis has recently become more important in the medical and biological sciences. Shape is all geometrical information that remains when location, scale and rotational effects are removed from an object. Allometry, which is a relationship between size and shape, plays an important role in the development of statistical shape analysis. The aim of the present study was to compare two different models for allometry which includes tangent coordinates and principal component scores of tangent coordinates as dependent variables in multivariate regression analysis. The results of the simulation study showed that the model constructed by taking tangent coordinates as dependent variables is more appropriate than the model constructed by taking principal component scores of tangent coordinates as dependent variables, for all sample sizes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ercan I, Ocakoglu G, Sigirli D, Ozkaya G (2012) Statistical shape analysis and usage in medical sciences. Turkiye Klinikleri J Biostat 4:27–35

    Google Scholar 

  2. Galilei G, Crew H, de Salvio A (1952) Dialogues concerning two new sciences. The Macmillan Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  3. Thompson DW (1942) On growth and form. University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  4. Lele SR, Richtsmeier JT (2001) An invariant approach to statistical analysis of shapes. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Florida

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Huxley JS (1924) Constant differential growth-ratios and their significance. Nature 114:895–896

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jolicoeur P (1963) The multivariate generalization of the allometry equation. Biometrics 19:497–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Klingenberg CP (1998) Heterochrony and allometry: the analysis of evolutionary change in ontogeny. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 73(1):79–123

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Mosimann JE (1970) Size allometry: size and shape variables with characterizations of the lognormal and generalized gamma distributions. J Am Statist Assoc 65:930–945

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gould SJ (1975) Allometry in primates, with emphasis on scaling and the evolution of the brain. Contrib Primatol 5:244–292

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dryden IL, Mardia KV (1998) Statistical shape analysis. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  11. Goodall C (1991) Procrustes methods in the statistical analysis of shape. J R Statist Soc B 53:285–339

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bookstein FL (1986) Size and shape spaces for landmark data in two dimensions. Statist Sci 1(2):181–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kendall DG (1984) Shape manifolds, procrustean metrics, and complex projective spaces. Bull London Math Soc 16(2):81–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hammer Ø, Harper DAT (2005) Paleontological data analysis. Wiley, Blackwell, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Berge C, Penin X (2004) Ontogenetic allometry, heterochrony, and interspecific differences in the skull of African apes, using tridimensional Procrustes analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol 124:124–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zelditch ML, Swiderski DL, Sheets HD, William LF (2004) Geometric morphometrics for biologists. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  17. Witelson SF (1989) Hand and sex differences in the isthmus and genu of the human corpus callosum a postmortem morphological study. Brain 112(3):799–835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ozdemir ST, Ercan I, Sevinc O, Guney I, Ocakoglu G, Aslan E, Barut C (2007) Statistical shape analysis of differences in the shape of the corpus callosum between genders. Anat Rec 290(7):825–830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sigirli D, Ercan I (2012) Examining growth with statistical shape analysis and comparison of growth models. J Mod Appl Stat Methods 11(2):479–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cardini A, Thorington RW Jr (2006) Postnatal ontogeny of marmot (Rodentia, Sciuridae) crania: allometric trajectories and species divergence. J Mammal 87:201–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sardi ML, Ventrice F, Ramírez RF (2007) Allometries throughout the late prenatal and early postnatal human craniofacial ontogeny. Anat Rec 290(9):1112–1120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Márquez F, Gonzalez-Jose R, Bigatti G (2011) Combined methods to detect pollution effects on shell shape and structure in Neogastropods. Ecol Indic 11(2):248–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Frost SR, Marcus LF, Bookstein FL, Reddy DP, Delson E (2003) Cranial allometry, phylogeography, and systematics of large bodied papionins (primates: Cercopithecinae) inferred from geometric morphometric analysis of landmark data. Anat Rec A Discov Mol Cell Evol Biol 275:1048–1072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cardini A, Elton S (2007) Sample size and sampling error in geometric morphometric studies of size and shape. Zoomorphology 126:121–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Uludag University, Gorukle Campus, 16059, Bursa, Turkey

    Deniz Sigirli & Ilker Ercan

Authors
  1. Deniz Sigirli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ilker Ercan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deniz Sigirli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sigirli, D., Ercan, I. Examining the Efficiency of Models Using Tangent Coordinates or Principal Component Scores in Allometry Studies. Interdiscip Sci Comput Life Sci 7, 249–256 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12539-015-0026-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12539-015-0026-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation