bscribe:
<mailto:googlegroups-manage+545891634474+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>,
<https://groups.google.com/a/morphometrics.org/group/morphmet/subscribe>
X-MXTHUNDER-Identifier:
X-MXTHUNDER-IP-Rating: 1, 140.142.32.139, Ugly c=0 p=0 Source New
X-MXTHUNDER-Scan-Result: 0
X-MXTHUNDER-Rules:
0-0-0-27281-c
X-MXTHUNDER-Clean: Yes
X-MXTHUNDER-Group: OK
--_000_MWHPR08MB28949DAFE67400802AD584DCA8D80MWHPR08MB2894namp_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Couple things. If your landmarks are on structures that doesn't change in s=
ize much during ontogeny, regardless of what happens in the rest of the sku=
ll, the centroid size cannot change either.
But more likely, you have a technical problem with for scaling.
I would suggest taking a simple length (eg., Skull length) in all your samp=
les and then see if those measurements makes make sense and show the variab=
ility that you expected to see in the size.
Hth,
M
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
From: Agnese Lanzetti
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2018 5:29:56 PM
To: MORPHMET
Subject: [MORPHMET] Centroid size correlation with size
Hi all,
I am encountering a strange pattern in my data and I'm not sure if it is a =
problem with how i am collecting the landmarks or it's actually just a stra=
nge but correct pattern.
I work with an ontogenetic series of baleen whale skulls. The skulls of the=
fetal specimens are very small (10-30 cm in length) compared to newborns o=
r adults (80-120 cm length). I would expect from my understanding of centro=
id size to increase progressively going from the early fetuses to the adult=
s, but this is not the case. The fetal stages seems to overall follow the p=
attern from small to big, but newborns and adults have more variable centro=
id sizes that overlap with the range of the fetuses.
I collect my landmarks in Avizo, and I changed the scale of the 3D models I=
imported from other software to scale the skulls to their real size.
Do you think there is a problem with the landmark collection or it could be=
possible that centroid size does not approximate actual skull size in this=
case?
Thanks a lot!
Agnese
agnese.lanze...@hotmail.it
--
MORPHMET may be accessed via its webpage at http://www.morphometrics.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
MORPHMET" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to morphmet+unsubscr...@morphometrics.org<mailto:morphmet+unsubscribe@=
morphometrics.org>.
--=20
MORPHMET may be accessed via its webpage at http://www.morphometrics.org
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
MORPHMET" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to morphmet+unsubscr...@morphometrics.org.
--_000_MWHPR08MB28949DAFE67400802AD584DCA8D80MWHPR08MB2894namp_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Couple things. If your landmarks are on structures that doesn't change in s=
ize much during ontogeny, regardless of what happens in the rest of the sku=
ll, the centroid size cannot change either.
But more likely, you have a technical problem with for scaling.
I would suggest taking a simple length (eg., Skull length) in all your samp=
les and then see if those measurements makes make sense and show the variab=
ility that you expected to see in the size.
Hth,
M
Get https://aka.ms/ghei36";>Outlook for Android
From: Agnese Lanzetti <a=
gnese.lanze...@hotmail.it>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2018 5:29:56 PM
To: MORPHMET
Subject: [MORPHMET] Centroid size correlation with size
Hi all,
I am encountering a strange pattern in my data and I'm not sure if it =
is a problem with how i am collecting the landmarks or it's actually just a=
strange but correct pattern.
I work with an ontogenetic series of baleen whale skulls. The skulls o=
f the fetal specimens are very small (10-30 cm in length) compared to newbo=
rns or adults (80-120 cm length). I would expect from my understanding of c=
entroid size to increase progressively
going from the early fetuses to the adults, but this is not the case. The =
fetal stages seems to overall follow the pattern from small to big, but new=
borns and adults have more variable centroid sizes that overlap with the ra=
nge of the fetuses.
I collect my landmarks in Avizo, and I changed the scale of the 3D mod=
els I imported from other software to scale the skulls to their real size.&=
nbsp;
Do you think there is a problem with the landmark collection or it cou=
ld be possible that centroid size does not approximate actual skull size in=
this case?
Thanks a lot!
Agnese
agne=
se.lanze...@hotmail.it
--
MORPHMET
