首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>PLoS Clinical Trials >Taxonomic validation of five fish species of subfamily Barbinae from the Ganga river system of northern India using traditional and truss analyses
【2h】

Taxonomic validation of five fish species of subfamily Barbinae from the Ganga river system of northern India using traditional and truss analyses

机译:使用传统和桁架分析对印度北部恒河水系中五种亚科Barbinae鱼类进行分类学验证

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Morphometric differences were investigated among five fish species of subfamily Barbinae from the Ganga river system through traditional morphometrics and the truss network system. Species taken into account were Puntius chola (Hamilton 1822), Puntius sophore (Hamilton 1822), Pethia ticto (Hamilton 1822), Pethia conchonius (Hamilton 1822) and Systomus sarana (Hamilton 1822). Although, taxonomists carefully examine external body features to discriminate these species, there is still a risk of misidentification during a visual assessment. In the present study, the traditional morphological analysis included 22 morphometric measurements and 10 meristic counts. Truss network system of 14 landmarks was interconnected to yield 91 distance variables. The principal component analysis (PCA), discriminant function analysis (DFA) and cluster analysis (CA) were employed in order to determine morphometric variations. In traditional analysis, 29 characters out of 32 were found significant (p<0.05). Eight principal components were extracted through PCA explaining 85.30% of the total variance in samples, DFA correctly classified 100.0% of original grouped cases and 100.0% of cross-validated grouped cases. Truss analysis showed that all the 90 characters were significant (p<0.05). PCA extracted four principal components explaining 96.45% of the total variance. DFA correctly classified 96.1% of original grouped cases and 92.1% of cross-validated grouped cases. The results acquired from the traditional as well as truss analyses indicate significant morphometric heterogeneity. However, variations are not the same for the two different methods (traditional and truss) employed for the analyses. Shape differences among species were evident from relative warps (RW) supporting truss network analysis. Geometric morphometric methods (GMM), but limited use of Procrustes methods revealed even very small dissimilarity between groups. In spite of determining the morphometric differentiation among species, the present study also provides a useful insight on the application and complementary role of truss analysis with traditional morphometric analysis in the correct classification of the selected species.
机译:通过传统的形态计量学和桁架网络系统,研究了恒河水系中Barbinae亚科五种鱼类的形态学差异。被考虑的物种有Puntius chola(汉密尔顿1822),Puntius sophore(汉密尔顿1822),Pethia ticto(汉密尔顿1822),Pethia conhonius(汉密尔顿1822)和Systomus sarana(汉密尔顿1822)。尽管分类学家仔细检查了外部特征以区分这些物种,但在目测评估中仍然存在识别错误​​的风险。在本研究中,传统的形态学分析包括22个形态测量值和10个meristic计数。 14个地标的桁架网络系统相互连接,产生91个距离变量。为了确定形态变化,采用了主成分分析(PCA),判别函数分析(DFA)和聚类分析(CA)。在传统分析中,发现32个字符中有29个字符有意义(p <0.05)。通过PCA提取了8个主要成分,解释了样本中总方差的85.30%,DFA正确分类了原始分组病例的100.0%和交叉验证分组病例的100.0%。桁架分析表明,所有90个字符均为显着性(p <0.05)。 PCA提取了四个主要成分,解释了总方差的96.45%。 DFA正确分类了原始分组病例的96.1%和交叉验证分组病例的92.1%。从传统分析和桁架分析获得的结果均表明存在明显的形态异质性。但是,用于分析的两种不同方法(传统方法和桁架方法)的变化并不相同。物种之间的形状差异从支持桁架网络分析的相对翘曲(RW)可以明显看出。几何形态计量学方法(GMM),但是Procrustes方法的使用有限,表明组之间的差异很小。尽管确定了物种之间的形态学差异,但本研究还提供了有关桁架分析与传统形态学分析在所选物种正确分类中的应用和互补作用的有用见解。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号