Análise comparativa entre técnicas morfométricas aplicadas a Odontesthes bonariensis (Valenciennes) e Odontesthes humensis De Buen (Osteichthyes, Atherinopsidae)

Comparative analysis among two different morphometric techniques used in Odontesthes bonariensis and Odontesthes humensis (Atherinopsidae)

Atherinopsidae; multivariate morphometry; truss networks; silverside

Análise comparativa entre técnicas morfométricas aplicadas a Odontesthes bonariensis (Valenciennes) e Odontesthes humensis De Buen (Osteichthyes, Atherinopsidae)

Comparative analysis among two different morphometric techniques used in Odontesthes bonariensis and Odontesthes humensis (Atherinopsidae)

Marlise de Azevedo Bemvenuti^I,II; Fábio Lameiro Rodrigues^I,III

^IDepartamento de Oceanografia, Fundação Universidade Federal do Rio Grande. Caixa Postal 474, 96201-900 Rio Grande, Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil

^IIE-mail: [e-mail]

^IIIE-mail: [e-mail]

ABSTRACT

The objective of this study was to compare two different morphometric methodologies - traditional measurements and truss networks - based on two species of silversides, Odontesthes bonariensis (Valenciennes, 1835) and O. humensis De Buen, 1953, to determine which of the methods results in more reliable distinction between groups. The traditional measures do not represent the true fish form because it does not take into account alometric variations or distinct growth stages. The measures with truss networks extend over the fish form thoroughly resulting in complete representation of the fish's body when homologous morphologic points are connected. The two sets of measures used in the principal components analysis resulted in two groups. The first principal component presented similar positive coefficients, being interpreted as a variation of "size", due to different stages of fish growth. The second component presented positive and negative coefficients, with different values that were interpreted as changes in the "shape" of the organisms. As the groups overlapped partially on the second component axis (the one that represents shape), data were adjusted to exclude the size effect. The first component, then, presented positive and negative coefficients that were related to changes in the shape of organisms. The variables with positive coefficients were related to the anterior area of the body, while the negative coefficients were associated with the caudal peduncle. These variables were the same ones found in both the adjusted and non-adjusted analysis. This study showed that measures with truss networks represented more clearly the difference between groups of O. bonariensis and O. humensis, than with the traditional measures.

Key words: Atherinopsidae, multivariate morphometry, truss networks, silverside

Texto completo disponível apenas em PDF.

Full text available only in PDF format.

AGRADECIMENTOS. Os autores agradecem ao pescador Waldeci Peres (Taim, Rio Grande, Rio Grande do Sul) pelo auxílio nas coletas, ao acadêmico Eduardo Wenzel Brião pela colaboração no tratamento estatístico e ao CNPq as bolsas de Iniciação Científica.

Recebido em 24.VIII.2001; aceito em 27.VIII.2002.

• Bemvenuti, M.A. 1997. Relações morfológicas e osteológicas entre Odontesthes perugiae e O. mirinensis (Teleostei: Atherinidae, Atherinopsinae) Atlântica, Rio Grande, 19:113-131.
• ______. 2000. Diferenciação geográfica do peixe-rei Odontesthes argentinensis (Atherinopsidae), no extremo sul do Brasil, através da morfometria multivariada. Atlântica, Rio Grande, 22:71-79
• ______. 2002. Diferenciação morfológica das espécies de peixes-rei, Odontesthes Evermann & Kendall (Osteichthyes, Atherinopsidae) no extremo sul do Brasil: morfometria multivariada. Revta bras. Zool. 19 (1):251-287.
• Bookstein, F.L 1993. A brief history of the morphometric synthesis, p. 15-40. In: L.F. Marcus; E. Bello & A. Garcia-Valdecasas (Eds). Contributions to morphometrics. Monografias del Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales 8, Madri.
• Bookstein, F.L.; B. Chernoff; R. Elder; J. Humphries; G. Smith & R. Strauss. 1985. Morphometrics in evolutionary biology. Acad. Nat. Sei. Philad. (15):1-277.
• Burnaby, T.P. 1966. Growth invariant discriminant functions and generalized distances. Biometrics 22:96-110.
• Humphries, J.M.; F.L. Bookstein; B. Chernoff; G.R. Smith; R.L. Elder & S.G. Poss. 1981. Multivariate discrimination by shape in relation to size. Syst. Zool. 30 (3):291-308.
• Jolicoeur, P. 1963. The multivariate generalization of the allometry equation. Biometrics 19:497-499.
• Monteiro, L.R. & S.F. Reis. 1998. Princípios de Morfometria Geométrica. Ribeirão Preto, Ed. Holos, 188p.
• Neff, N.A. & L.F. Marcus. 1980. A survey of multivariate methods for systematics. New York Privately published, 234p.
• Reis, S.F. 1988. Morfometria e estatística multivariada em biologia evolutiva. Revta bras. Zool. 5 (4):571-580.
• Reis, S.F.; R.A. Cunha; J.C. Garavello & A.S. Abe. 1987. Discriminação pela forma em relação ao tamanho: um exemplo com peixes do gênero Leporinus. Ci. Cult. 39 (8):757-761.
• Reyment, R.A. 1985. Multivariate morphometrics and analysis of shape. Mathematical Geology 17 (6):591-609.
• Reyment, R.A.; R.E. Blackith; N.A. Campbell. 1984. Multivariate morphometrics. London, Academic Press, 2^nd ed., 233p.
• Rohlf, F.J. 1990. Morphometrics. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 21:299-316.
• ______. 1998. NTSYS-pc. Numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system. New York, Department of Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook, Version 2.0.
• Sokal, R.R. & F.J. Rohlf. 1981. Biometry. San Francisco, W.H. Freeman, 2^nd ed., 859p.
• Strauss, R.E. & F.L. Bookstein. 1982. The truss: body form reconstructions in morphometrics. Syst. Zool. 31 (2):113-135.

Datas de Publicação

• Publicação nesta coleção
  15 Maio 2009
• Data do Fascículo
  Set 2002

Histórico

• Aceito
  27 Ago 2002
• Recebido
  24 Ago 2001