Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

Is shape in the eye of the beholder? Assessing landmarking error in geometric morphometric analyses on live fish

Moccetti, Paolo; Rodger, Jessica R.; Bolland, Jonathan D.; Kaiser-Wilks, Phoebe; Smith, Rowan; Nunn, Andy D.; Adams, Colin E.; Bright, Jen A.; Honkanen, Hannele M.; Lothian, Angus J.; Newton, Matthew; Joyce, Domino A.

Authors

Paolo Moccetti

Jessica R. Rodger

Phoebe Kaiser-Wilks

Rowan Smith

Colin E. Adams

Hannele M. Honkanen

Angus J. Lothian

Matthew Newton



Abstract

Geometric morphometrics is widely used to quantify morphological variation between biological specimens, but the fundamental influence of operator bias on data reproducibility is rarely considered, particularly in studies using photographs of live animals taken under field conditions. We examined this using four independent operators that applied an identical landmarking scheme to replicate photographs of 291 live Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) from two rivers. Using repeated measures tests, we found significant inter-operator differences in mean body shape, suggesting that the operators introduced a systematic error despite following the same landmarking scheme. No significant differences were detected when the landmarking process was repeated by the same operator on a random subset of photographs. Importantly, in spite of significant operator bias, small but statistically significant morphological differences between fish from the two rivers were found consistently by all operators. Pairwise tests of angles of vectors of shape change showed that these between-river differences in body shape were analogous across operator datasets, suggesting a general reproducibility of findings obtained by geometric morphometric studies. In contrast, merging landmark data when fish from each river are digitised by different operators had a significant impact on downstream analyses, highlighting an intrinsic risk of bias. Overall, we show that, even when significant inter-operator error is introduced during digitisation, following an identical landmarking scheme can identify morphological differences between populations. This study indicates that operators digitising at least a sub-set of all data groups of interest may be an effective way of mitigating inter-operator error and potentially enabling data sharing.

Citation

Moccetti, P., Rodger, J. R., Bolland, J. D., Kaiser-Wilks, P., Smith, R., Nunn, A. D., Adams, C. E., Bright, J. A., Honkanen, H. M., Lothian, A. J., Newton, M., & Joyce, D. A. (2023). Is shape in the eye of the beholder? Assessing landmarking error in geometric morphometric analyses on live fish. PeerJ, 11, Article e15545. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.15545

Journal Article Type Article
Acceptance Date May 22, 2023
Online Publication Date Aug 17, 2023
Publication Date Jan 1, 2023
Deposit Date Aug 30, 2023
Publicly Available Date Aug 31, 2023
Journal PeerJ
Electronic ISSN 2167-8359
Publisher PeerJ
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 11
Article Number e15545
DOI https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.15545
Keywords Measurement error; Bias; Landmarks; Morphometrics; Replication crisis; Reproducibility; Open science; Salmo salar; Atlantic salmon; Salmonids
Public URL https://hull-repository.worktribe.com/output/4365697

Files

Published article (4.4 Mb)
PDF

Publisher Licence URL
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

Copyright Statement
© 2023 Moccetti et al.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.




You might also like



Downloadable Citations