Developmental Dynamics and G-Matrices: Can Morphometric Spaces be Used to Model Phenotypic Evolution?

By P. D. Polly. Evolutionary biology, 2008

115 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Analyzing Fluctuating Asymmetry with Geometric Morphometrics: Concepts, Methods, and Applications (2015, background): “Note that, even though some authors have claimed that such methods are “homology-free” [285], all these approaches are based in one way or another on a one-to-one correspondence of points on the outline or surface, which is the basis for the computations of mutual fit or difference between shapes [2”
Novelty and “Homology-free” Morphometrics: What’s in a Name? (2008, methodology): “Therefore, Polly (2008) suggests that novelty is best analyzed by what he calls ‘‘homology-free’’ characterizations of the phenotype.”
Heritability is not Evolvability (2011, background): “…literature on definitions, dynamics and determinants of evolvability (see e.g. Wagner and Altenberg 1996; Schlichting and Murren 2004; Hansen 2006; Willi et al. 2006; Hendrikse et al. 2007; Polly 2008; Brookfield 2009 for review), but there has been little discussion of how to quantify the concept.”
Semilandmarks: a method for quantifying curves and surfaces (2013, methodology): “The obvious advantage of such a semi-automated data collection is the possibility to process large sample sizes in a fairly short amount of time (Polly, 2008; Klingenberg, 2008).”