Disparities in the analysis of morphological disparity

Thomas Guillerme; Cooper Natalie; Steve Brusatte; Katie Davis; Andrew Jackson; Sylvain Gerber; Anjali Goswami; Kevin Healy; Melanie Hopkins; Marc Jones; Graeme Lloyd; Joseph E O'Reilly; Abi Pate; Mark N Puttick; Emily J Rayfield; Erin Saupe; Emma Sherratt; Graham Slater; Vera Weisbecker; Gavin Thomas; Philip C J Donoghue

doi:10.1098/rsbl.2020.0199

Disparities in the analysis of morphological disparity

Thomas Guillerme^*, Cooper Natalie, Steve Brusatte, Katie Davis, Andrew Jackson, Sylvain Gerber, Anjali Goswami, Kevin Healy, Melanie Hopkins, Marc Jones, Graeme Lloyd, Joseph E O'Reilly, Abi Pate, Mark N Puttick, Emily J Rayfield, Erin Saupe, Emma Sherratt, Graham Slater, Vera Weisbecker, Gavin ThomasPhilip C J Donoghue

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article (Academic Journal) › peer-review

65 Citations (Scopus)

85 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Analyses of morphological disparity have been used to characterise and investigate the evolution of variation in the anatomy, function, and ecology of organisms since the 1980s. While a diversity of methods have been employed, it is unclear whether they provide equivalent insights. Here we review the most commonly used approaches for characterising and analysing morphological disparity, all of which have associated limitations that, if ignored, can lead to misinterpretation. We propose best practice guidelines for disparity analyses, while noting that there can be no “one-size-fits-all” approach. The available tools should always be used in the context of a specific biological question that will determine data and method selection at every stage of the analysis.

Original language	English
Number of pages	8
Journal	Biology Letters
Volume	16
Issue number	7
Early online date	1 Jul 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2020.0199
Publication status	Published - 29 Jul 2020

Research Groups and Themes

MSc Palaeobiology

Keywords

multidimensionality
palaeobiology
ecology
morphology
disparity
variance/variation

Access to Document

10.1098/rsbl.2020.0199

Full-text PDF (author accepted manuscript)
This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via The Royal Society at https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2020.0199. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Accepted author manuscript, 429 KB

Handle.net

Persistent link

Reconciling disparate perspectives on the evolution of disparity
Donoghue, P. C. J. (Principal Investigator)
1/04/17 → 31/03/18
Project: Research
Neoproterozoic - Phanerozoic transition
Donoghue, P. C. J. (Principal Investigator)
9/01/17 → 31/07/22
Project: Research
Improving Bayesian methods for estimating divergence times integrating genomic and trait data
Donoghue, P. C. J. (Principal Investigator)
25/03/16 → 31/12/21
Project: Research

Cite this

Guillerme, T., Natalie, C., Brusatte, S., Davis, K., Jackson, A., Gerber, S., Goswami, A., Healy, K., Hopkins, M., Jones, M., Lloyd, G., O'Reilly, J. E., Pate, A., Puttick, M. N., Rayfield, E. J., Saupe, E., Sherratt, E., Slater, G., Weisbecker, V., ... Donoghue, P. C. J. (2020). Disparities in the analysis of morphological disparity. Biology Letters, 16(7). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2020.0199

@article{f9a0430d707b4a2d8abf400e7e127a53,

title = "Disparities in the analysis of morphological disparity",

abstract = "Analyses of morphological disparity have been used to characterise and investigate the evolution of variation in the anatomy, function, and ecology of organisms since the 1980s. While a diversity of methods have been employed, it is unclear whether they provide equivalent insights. Here we review the most commonly used approaches for characterising and analysing morphological disparity, all of which have associated limitations that, if ignored, can lead to misinterpretation. We propose best practice guidelines for disparity analyses, while noting that there can be no “one-size-fits-all” approach. The available tools should always be used in the context of a specific biological question that will determine data and method selection at every stage of the analysis.",

keywords = "multidimensionality, palaeobiology, ecology, morphology, disparity, variance/variation",

author = "Thomas Guillerme and Cooper Natalie and Steve Brusatte and Katie Davis and Andrew Jackson and Sylvain Gerber and Anjali Goswami and Kevin Healy and Melanie Hopkins and Marc Jones and Graeme Lloyd and O'Reilly, {Joseph E} and Abi Pate and Puttick, {Mark N} and Rayfield, {Emily J} and Erin Saupe and Emma Sherratt and Graham Slater and Vera Weisbecker and Gavin Thomas and Donoghue, {Philip C J}",

year = "2020",

month = jul,

day = "29",

doi = "10.1098/rsbl.2020.0199",

language = "English",

volume = "16",

journal = "Biology Letters",

issn = "1744-9561",

publisher = "The Royal Society",

number = "7",

}

Guillerme, T, Natalie, C, Brusatte, S, Davis, K, Jackson, A, Gerber, S, Goswami, A, Healy, K, Hopkins, M, Jones, M, Lloyd, G, O'Reilly, JE, Pate, A, Puttick, MN, Rayfield, EJ, Saupe, E, Sherratt, E, Slater, G, Weisbecker, V, Thomas, G & Donoghue, PCJ 2020, 'Disparities in the analysis of morphological disparity', Biology Letters, vol. 16, no. 7. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2020.0199

TY - JOUR

T1 - Disparities in the analysis of morphological disparity

AU - Guillerme, Thomas

AU - Natalie, Cooper

AU - Brusatte, Steve

AU - Davis, Katie

AU - Jackson, Andrew

AU - Gerber, Sylvain

AU - Goswami, Anjali

AU - Healy, Kevin

AU - Hopkins, Melanie

AU - Jones, Marc

AU - Lloyd, Graeme

AU - O'Reilly, Joseph E

AU - Pate, Abi

AU - Puttick, Mark N

AU - Rayfield, Emily J

AU - Saupe, Erin

AU - Sherratt, Emma

AU - Slater, Graham

AU - Weisbecker, Vera

AU - Thomas, Gavin

AU - Donoghue, Philip C J

PY - 2020/7/29

Y1 - 2020/7/29

N2 - Analyses of morphological disparity have been used to characterise and investigate the evolution of variation in the anatomy, function, and ecology of organisms since the 1980s. While a diversity of methods have been employed, it is unclear whether they provide equivalent insights. Here we review the most commonly used approaches for characterising and analysing morphological disparity, all of which have associated limitations that, if ignored, can lead to misinterpretation. We propose best practice guidelines for disparity analyses, while noting that there can be no “one-size-fits-all” approach. The available tools should always be used in the context of a specific biological question that will determine data and method selection at every stage of the analysis.

AB - Analyses of morphological disparity have been used to characterise and investigate the evolution of variation in the anatomy, function, and ecology of organisms since the 1980s. While a diversity of methods have been employed, it is unclear whether they provide equivalent insights. Here we review the most commonly used approaches for characterising and analysing morphological disparity, all of which have associated limitations that, if ignored, can lead to misinterpretation. We propose best practice guidelines for disparity analyses, while noting that there can be no “one-size-fits-all” approach. The available tools should always be used in the context of a specific biological question that will determine data and method selection at every stage of the analysis.

KW - multidimensionality

KW - palaeobiology

KW - ecology

KW - morphology

KW - disparity

KW - variance/variation

U2 - 10.1098/rsbl.2020.0199

DO - 10.1098/rsbl.2020.0199

M3 - Review article (Academic Journal)

C2 - 32603646

SN - 1744-9561

VL - 16

JO - Biology Letters

JF - Biology Letters

IS - 7

ER -

Disparities in the analysis of morphological disparity

Abstract

Research Groups and Themes

Keywords

Access to Document

Handle.net

Fingerprint

Projects

Reconciling disparate perspectives on the evolution of disparity

Neoproterozoic - Phanerozoic transition

Improving Bayesian methods for estimating divergence times integrating genomic and trait data

Cite this