Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40289084›Full record

ArticleBMC ecology and evolution2025

Assessing the application of landmark-free morphometrics to macroevolutionary analyses.

James M Mulqueeney, Thomas H G Ezard, Anjali Goswami

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Opportunities and Challenges in Applying AI to Evolutionary Morphology.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

James M MulqueeneySchool for Ocean & Earth Science, National Oceanography Centre Southampton, University of Southampton Waterfront Campus, Southampton, UK. j.m.mulqueeney@soton.ac.uk.
Thomas H G EzardSchool for Ocean & Earth Science, National Oceanography Centre Southampton, University of Southampton Waterfront Campus, Southampton, UK.
Anjali GoswamiDepartment of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, London, UK.

Funding

European Research Council STG-2014-637171Leverhulme Trust RPG-2021-424Natural Environmental Research Council NE/P019269/1Natural Environmental Research Council NE/S007210/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study of phenotypic evolution has been transformed in recent decades by methods allowing precise quantification of anatomical shape, in particular 3D geometric morphometrics. While this effectiveness of geometric morphometrics has been demonstrated by thousands of studies, it generally requires manual or semi-automated landmarking, which is time-consuming, susceptible to operator bias, and limits comparisons across morphologically disparate taxa. Emerging automated methods, particularly landmark-free techniques, offer potential solutions, but these approaches have thus far been primarily applied to closely related forms. In this study, we explore the utility of automated, landmark-free approaches for macroevolutionary analyses. We compare an application of Large Deformation Diffeomorphic Metric Mapping (LDDMM) known as Deterministic Atlas Analysis (DAA) with a high-density geometric morphometric approach, using a dataset of 322 mammals spanning 180 families. Initially, challenges arose from using mixed modalities (computed tomography (CT) and surface scans), which we addressed by standardising the data by using Poisson surface reconstruction that creates watertight, closed surfaces for all specimens. After standardisation, we observed a significant improvement in the correspondence between patterns of shape variation measured using manual landmarking and DAA, although differences emerged, especially for Primates and Cetacea. We further evaluated the downstream effects of these differences on macroevolutionary analyses, finding that both methods produced comparable but varying estimates of phylogenetic signal, morphological disparity and evolutionary rates. Our findings highlight the potential of landmark-free approaches like DAA for large scale studies across disparate taxa, owing to their enhanced efficiency. However, they also reveal several challenges that should be addressed before these methods can be widely adopted. In this context, we outline these issues, propose solutions based on existing literature, and identify potential avenues for further research. We argue that by incorporating these improvements, the application of landmark-free analyses could be expanded, thereby enhancing the scope of morphometric studies and enabling the analysis of larger and more diverse datasets.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionMammalsAnimalsGeometric morphometricsLandmark-free morphometricsMacroevolutionMammaliaMorphometricsShape

Identifiers

PMID40289084
PMCPMC12034209

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.