1986Systematic BiologyRequires access

Assessment of Morphometric Variation in Natural Populations: the Inadequacy of the Univariate Approach

Michael R. Willig, Robert D. Owen, Randall L. Colbert

Open publisher page 69 citations

Abstract

Systematists often attempt to avoid the problem of correlated characters by establishing an arbitrary number of variables that must be significant before groups are considered distinct. The appropriateness of this approach has not been evaluated empirically in the biological literature. We analyzed morphometric data for 27 species of bats from the Brazilian Northeast. Twenty-two mensural characters (12 cranial, 10 external) were analyzed for interlocality and secondary sexual variation in each species using ANOVA and MANOVA. The univariate and multivariate analyses showed little correspondence; no predictable relationship between the number of characters exhibiting significance for a particular treatment effect in the univariate analyses and the significance level for that treatment in the multivariate analysis was discernible. Small sample sizes or disparate sample sizes do not contribute to this phenomenon. Results ranged from: 11 of 12 characters significant using ANOVA and nonsignificance in the MANOVA; to no character significant using the ANOVA with significance in the multivariate analysis. Because MANOVA utilizes rather than ignores correlations among characters, it is the correct statistical test for evaluating overall group differences. We show that even conservative interpretations of the univariate results can lead to erroneous systematic conclusions.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Systematists often attempt to avoid the problem of correlated characters by establishing an arbitrary number of variables that must be significant before groups are considered distinct. The appropriateness of this approach has not been evaluated empirically in the biological literature. We analyzed morphometric data for 27 species of bats from the Brazilian Northeast. Twenty-two mensural characters (12 cranial, 10 external) were analyzed for interlocality and secondary sexual variation in each species using ANOVA and MANOVA. The univariate and multivariate analyses showed little correspondence; no predictable relationship between the number of characters exhibiting significance for a particular treatment effect in the univariate analyses and the significance level for that treatment in the multivariate analysis was discernible. Small sample sizes or disparate sample sizes do not contribute to this phenomenon. Results ranged from: 11 of 12 characters significant using ANOVA and nonsignificance in the MANOVA; to no character significant using the ANOVA with significance in the multivariate analysis. Because MANOVA utilizes rather than ignores correlations among characters, it is the correct statistical test for evaluating overall group differences. We show that even conservative interpretations of the univariate results can lead to erroneous systematic conclusions.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 69 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Systematists often attempt to avoid the problem of correlated characters by establishing an arbitrary number of variables that must be significant before groups are considered distinct. The appropriateness of this approach has not been evaluated empirically in the biological literature. We analyzed morphometric data for 27 species of bats from the Brazilian Northeast. Twenty-two mensural characters (12 cranial, 10 external) were analyzed for interlocality and secondary sexual variation in each species using ANOVA and MANOVA. The univariate and multivariate analyses showed little correspondence; no predictable relationship between the number of characters exhibiting significance for a particular treatment effect in the univariate analyses and the significance level for that treatment in the multivariate analysis was discernible. Small sample sizes or disparate sample sizes do not contribute to this phenomenon. Results ranged from: 11 of 12 characters significant using ANOVA and nonsignificance in the MANOVA; to no character significant using the ANOVA with significance in the multivariate analysis. Because MANOVA utilizes rather than ignores correlations among characters, it is the correct statistical test for evaluating overall group differences. We show that even conservative interpretations of the univariate results can lead to erroneous systematic conclusions.

Key concepts: Multivariate analysis of variance, Univariate, Multivariate statistics, Analysis of variance, Biology, Multivariate analysis, Sample size determination, Variation (astronomy)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Assessment of Morphometric Variation in Natural Populations: the Inadequacy of the Univariate Approach — Research Paper | ScholarLens