Measurement error and effect size in geometric morphometrics: assessing the impact of 2D landmark digitization error in interspecific comparisons of Procrustes shape data

Abstract Geometric morphometrics is widely used in mammalogy, taxonomy and other biological disciplines to compare organismal forms. For accurate shape analysis, however, measurement error (ME) must be carefully assessed. To this aim, there are different approaches, including a recently proposed method that partitions systematic and random ME and tests their variance ratio to detect a significant directional error (i.e., a bias). Using 2D data on ventral views of adult marmot crania with multiple replicate landmark digitizations, I explored the effect of time lags between digitizations and assessed the impact of potential biases due to digitization error. I found a statistically significant bias, whose magnitude showed a non-linear increase with the time interval between two digitizations. This observation supports recent evidence for the potential occurrence of a ‘visiting scientist effect’, when landmarks are digitized in separate visits to museum collections. However, the bias impact depends on the magnitude of the biological variation being investigated: thus, while a small systematic ME may be enough to overturn conclusions on sexual dimorphism, as demonstrated in previous research on a subsample of the current dataset, a similar significant bias has a mostly negligible effect on tests of interspecific mean shape differences, which in marmots are much larger than sex differences. This suggests that, while statistical significance in the test for systematic ME is a useful warning, researchers might also evaluate the ratio between the effect size of the biological signal of interest and the magnitude of the bias to accurately interpret the impact of ME.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zoomorphology
Published
2025-04-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00435-025-00717-3
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Morphological variations and asymmetry
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.18

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Measurement error and effect size in geometric morphometrics: assessing the impact of 2D landmark digitization error in interspecific comparisons of Procrustes shape data

Andrea Cardini
2 citations
Zoomorphology
Morphological variations and asymmetry
8.18
article

Measurement error and effect size in geometric morphometrics: assessing the impact of 2D landmark digitization error in interspecific comparisons of Procrustes shape data

Andrea Cardini
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Geometric morphometrics is widely used in mammalogy, taxonomy and other biological disciplines to compare organismal forms. For accurate shape analysis, however, measurement error (ME) must be carefully assessed. To this aim, there are different approaches, including a recently proposed method that partitions systematic and random ME and tests their variance ratio to detect a significant directional error (i.e., a bias). Using 2D data on ventral views of adult marmot crania with multiple replicate landmark digitizations, I explored the effect of time lags between digitizations and assessed the impact of potential biases due to digitization error. I found a statistically significant bias, whose magnitude showed a non-linear increase with the time interval between two digitizations. This observation supports recent evidence for the potential occurrence of a ‘visiting scientist effect’, when landmarks are digitized in separate visits to museum collections. However, the bias impact depends on the magnitude of the biological variation being investigated: thus, while a small systematic ME may be enough to overturn conclusions on sexual dimorphism, as demonstrated in previous research on a subsample of the current dataset, a similar significant bias has a mostly negligible effect on tests of interspecific mean shape differences, which in marmots are much larger than sex differences. This suggests that, while statistical significance in the test for systematic ME is a useful warning, researchers might also evaluate the ratio between the effect size of the biological signal of interest and the magnitude of the bias to accurately interpret the impact of ME.

ZoomorphologyVol. 144(2)
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia (IT), The University of Western Australia (AU)
Università Degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emila
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Morphological variations and asymmetry
8.18
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.