ArticleSystematic biology2021
Detecting Phylogenetic Signal and Adaptation in Papionin Cranial Shape by Decomposing Variation at Different Spatial Scales.
Article in Systematic biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phylogenetic Inference from Atomized 3D Morphometric Data: A Case Study using Kangaroos.Systematic biology · 2026Article
- Virtual reconstruction and analysis of the face of DFN3-150 Paradolichopithecus aff. arvernensis specimen from Dafnero, Greece.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Exploring Phylogenetic Signal in Multivariate Phenotypes by Maximizing Blomberg's K.Systematic biology · 2025Article
- Cortical areas associated to higher cognition drove primate brain evolution.Communications biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Phylogenetic reconstruction based on morphometric data is hampered by homoplasies. For example, many similarities in cranial form between primate taxa more strongly reflect ecological similarities rather than phylogenetic relatedness. However, the way in which the different cranial bones constitute cranial form is, if at all, of less functional relevance and thus largely hidden from selection. We propose that these "constructional details" are better indicators of phylogenetic history than any large-scale shape feature or raw form variable. Within a geometric morphometric context, we show how to analyze the relative extent of bones independently of differences in overall shape. We also show how to decompose total shape variation into small-scale and large-scale shape variation. We apply both methods to the midsagittal cranial morphology of papionin monkeys, which are well known for the discrepancy between morphological similarities and phylogenetic relationships. We study phylogenetic signal and functional adaptation using a molecular phylogeny and contextual data on feeding ecology and locomotor behavior. As expected, total cranial shape, bone outline shape, and large-scale shape features were only weakly associated with phylogenetic distance. But the relative bone contributions and small-scale shape features were both highly correlated with phylogenetic distances. By contrast, the association with ecological and behavioral variables was strongest for the outline shape and large-scale shape features. Studies of morphological adaptation and phylogenetic history thus profit from a decomposition of shape variation into different spatial scales. [Adaptation; canalization; cranial shape; geometric morphometrics; papionini; partial warps; phylogeny.].
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.