----- Forwarded message from [email protected] ----- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 09:34:38 -0500 From: [email protected] Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: Re: missing structures To: [email protected]
Dear Patrick, you can probably let your missing landmarks overlap with existing ones if you think that the structure simply disappeared because of function. All the best Carlo Quoting [email protected]: > > ----- Forwarded message from Patrick Arnold > <[email protected]> ----- > > Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 04:48:42 -0500 > From: Patrick Arnold <[email protected]> > Reply-To: Patrick Arnold <[email protected]> > Subject: missing structures > To: [email protected] > > Dear all, > > I am examining different vertebrae with GMM. Unfurtunatly in one group > of vertebrae (C7) some structures are lacking which are very distinct > in all the other groups of vertebrae, thus being very good landmark > locations. The structure are definetly missing in C7 because they do > not appear in ontogeny (No Tuberculum ventralis because no costal > primordium and no Foramen transversum). My problem is now, how to deal > with missing structure because I do not want to exclude this landmarks > because they are so nice landmarks in all the other vertebrae. Is > their any solution in the workflow? > > Thanks for answering. > > Patrick Arnold > Institute for Systematic Zoology and Evolutionary Biology > Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena > Germany > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > This message was sent through https://webmail.uni-jena.de > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > > > ----- End forwarded message -----
