4.3 Article

Morphological integration of anatomical, developmental, and functional postcranial modules in the crab-eating macaque (Macaca fascicularis)

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
卷 166, 期 3, 页码 661-670

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.23456

关键词

covariance; integration; modularity; postcranium

资金

  1. SUNY Research Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectivesIntegration and modularity reflect the coordinated action of past evolutionary processes and, in turn, constrain or facilitate phenotypic evolvability. Here, we analyze magnitudes of integration in the macaque postcranium to test whether 20 a priori defined modules are (1) more tightly integrated than random sets of postcranial traits, and (2) are differentiated based on mode of definition, with developmental modules expected to be more integrated than functional or anatomical modules. Materials and MethodsThe 3D morphometric data collected for eight limb and girdle bones for 60 macaques were collated into anatomical, developmental, and functional modules. A resampling technique was used to create random samples of integration values for each module for statistical comparison. ResultsOur results found that not all a priori defined modules were more strongly integrated than random samples of postcranial traits and that specific types of modules did not present consistent patterns of integration. Rather, girdle and joint modules were consistently less integrated than limb modules, and forelimb elements were less integrated than hindlimbs. DiscussionThe results suggest that morphometrically complex modules tend to be less integrated than simple limb bones, irrespective of the number of available traits. However, differences in integration of the fore- and hindlimb more likely reflects the multitude of locomotory, feeding, and social functions involved. It remains to be tested whether patterns of integration identified here are primate universals, and to what extent they vary depending on phylogenetic or functional factors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据