首页> 外文OA文献 >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:北方印度甘河制度的分类验证五种鱼类贝巴尼使用传统和桁架分析

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:通过传统的形态学测定学和桁架网络系统研究了来自Ganga River System的五种鱼类百草蛋白的形态差异。考虑到的物种是Puntius Chola(Hamilton 1822),Puntius Sophore(Hamilton 1822),Pethia Ticto(Hamilton 1822),Pethia Conchonius(Hamilton 1822)和Systomus Sarana(Hamilton 1822)。尽管分类学家仔细检查外部身体的特征以区分这些物种,但在视觉评估期间仍有误识别的风险。在本研究中,传统的形态学分析包括22个形态测量和10个单一计数。 14个地标网络系统相互连接以产生91个距离变量。采用主成分分析(PCA),判别函数分析(DFA)和聚类分析(CA)以确定形态学变异。在传统分析中,32个中的29个字符被发现显着(P <0.05)。通过PCA提取八个主要成分,解释样品总差异的85.30%,DFA正确分类为100.0%的原始分组病例和100.0%的交叉验证分组病例。桁架分析表明,所有90个字符都很显着(P <0.05)。 PCA提取了四个主要成分,解释了总方差的96.45%。 DFA正确分类为96.1%的原始分组案例,92.1%的交叉验证分组案件。从传统和桁架分析中获得的结果表明了显着的形态学异质性。然而,对于用于分析的两种不同的方法(传统和桁架),变化不相同。物种之间的形状差异是从支持桁架网络分析的相对经线(RW)明显。几何形态学方法(GMM),但使用的使用有限的营养方法揭示了组之间的非常小的异化。尽管确定了物种中的形态学分化,但本研究还对桁架分析与传统形态学分析的应用和互补作用提供了有益的识别,在所选物种的正确分类中。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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