Advertisement

Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 91–112 | Cite as

Advances in morphometric identification of fishery stocks

  • Steven X. Cadrin
Article

Abstract

Geographic variation in morphometry has been used todiscriminate local forms of fish for over a century. The historical development of stock identificationmethods has paralleled the advancement of morphometrictechniques. The earliest analyses of morphometricvariables for stock identification were univariatecomparisons, but were soon followed by bivariateanalyses of relative growth to detect ontogeneticchanges and geographic variation among fishstocks. As the field of multivariatemorphometrics flourished, a suite of multivariatemethods was applied to quantify variation in growthand form among stocks. More recent advances have beenfacilitated by image processing techniques, morecomprehensive and precise data collection, moreefficient quantification of shape, and new analyticaltools. Many benchmark case studies and critiquesoffer guidelines for sampling morphometrics andinterpreting multivariate analyses for exploratorystock identification, stock discrimination, and stockdelineation. As examples of morphometric stockidentification based on life history differences,allometric patterns of crustacean secondary sexcharacters have been used to detect geographicvariation in size at maturity, and morphometriccorrelates to smoltification have been used todiscriminate salmon from different rivers. Morphometric analysis provides a powerful complementto genetic and environmental stock identificationapproaches. The challenge for the future ofmorphometric stock identification is to develop aconsensus on biological interpretations of geometricanalyses, similar to the conventional interpretationsof size and shape from traditional multivariatemorphometrics.

fisheries morphometric stock identification 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackerly, S.C. (1990) Using growth functions to identify homologous landmarks on molluscs. In: Rohlf, F.J., Bookstein, F. L. eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshop. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Spec. Pub. 2, pp. 339–344.Google Scholar
  2. Airoldi, J.-P. and Flury, B.K. (1988) An application of common principal component analysis to cranial morphometry of Microtus californicus and M. ochrogaster (Mammalia, Rodentia). J. Zool. (London) 216, 21–36.Google Scholar
  3. Alberch, P., Gould, S.J., Oster, G.F., and Wake, D.B. (1979) Size and shape in ontogeny and phylogeny. Paleobiology 5, 296–317.Google Scholar
  4. Armstrong, M.P. and Cadrin, S.X. (2001) Morphometric patterns within and among spawning aggregations of Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) off the northeast United States. In Herring 2001. Alaska Sea Grant Report AK-SG-2000-01 (in press).Google Scholar
  5. Atchley, W.R. (1978) Ratios, regression intercepts, and the scaling of data. Syst. Zool. 27, 78–83.Google Scholar
  6. Atchley, W.R., Gaskins, C.T., and Anderson, D. (1976) Statistical properties of ratios. Syst. Zool. 25, 137–148.Google Scholar
  7. Beacham, T.D. (1984) Age and morphology of chum salmon in southern British Columbia. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 113, 727–736.Google Scholar
  8. Beacham, T.D. (1985) Variation and morphometric variation in pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) in southern British Columbia and Puget Sound. Can. J. Zool. 63, 366–372.Google Scholar
  9. Beacham, T.D., Gould, A.P., and Stefanson, A.P. (1983). Size, age, meristics, and morphometrics of chum salmon returning to southern British Columbia during 1981- 1982. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1207.Google Scholar
  10. Beacham, T.D. and Murray, C.B. (1987) Adaptive variation in body size, age, morphology, egg size and developmental biology of chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) in British Columbia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 44, 244–261.Google Scholar
  11. Beacham, T.D., Murray, C.B. and Withler, R.E. (1988a) Age, morphology, developmental biology and biochemical genetic variation of Yukon River fall chum salmon, Oncorhynchus keta, and comparisons with British Columbia populations. Fish. Bull. 86, 663–674.Google Scholar
  12. Beacham, T.D., Withler, R.E., Murray, C.B. and Barner, L.W. (1988b) Variation in body size, morphology, egg size and biochemical genetics of pink salmon in British Columbia. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 117, 109–126.Google Scholar
  13. Begg, G., Friedland, K.D. and Pearce, J.B. (1999) Stock Identification - its role in stock assessment and fisheries management. Fish. Res. 43, 1–8.Google Scholar
  14. Berg, R.E. (1979) External morphology of the pink salmon, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha, introduced into Lake Superior. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 36, 1283–1287.Google Scholar
  15. Blackith, R.E. and Reyment, R.A. (1971) Multivariate Morphometrics. Academic Press, London, 71 pp.Google Scholar
  16. Bond, C.E. (1979) Biology of Fishes. Saunders College Publishing, Philadelphia, 514 pp.Google Scholar
  17. Booke, H.E. (1981). The conundrum of the stock concept - are nature and nurture definable in fishery science? Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 38, 1479–1480.Google Scholar
  18. Bookstein, F.L. (1990) Introduction to methods for landmark data. In: Rohlf, F.J., Bookstein, F. L. eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshop. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Spec. Pub. 2, pp. 215–226.Google Scholar
  19. Bookstein, F.L. (1991) Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data: Geometry and Biology. Cambridge Univ. Press, 435 pp.Google Scholar
  20. Bookstein, F.L., Chernoff, B., Elder, R.L., Humphries, J.M., Smith, G.R. and Strauss, R.E. (1985) Morphometrics in Evolutionary Biology, the Geometry of Size and Shape Change with Examples from Fishes. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia Spec. Pub. 15, 277 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Bookstein, F.L., Strauss, R.E., Humphries, J.M., Chernoff, B., Elder, R.L. and Smith, G.R. (1982) A comment on the use of Fourier methods in systematics. Syst. Zool. 31, 85–92.Google Scholar
  22. Bowering, W.R. (1988) An analysis of morphometric characters of Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) in the Northwest Atlantic using a multivariate analysis of covariance. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 45, 580–585.Google Scholar
  23. Bowering, W.R., Misra, R.K. and Brodie, W.B. (1998) Application of a newly developed statistical procedure to morphometric data from American plaice (Hippoglossoides platessoides) in the Canadian Northwest Atlantic. Fish. Res. 34, 191–203.Google Scholar
  24. Brown, B.E., Darcy, G.H. and Overholtz, W. (1987) Stock assessment/ stock identification: an interactive process. In: Kumpf, H.E., Vaught, R.N., Grimes, C.B., Johnson, A.G. and Nakamura, E.L. eds. Proceedings of the Stock Identification Workshop. NOAA Tech. Mem. NMFS-SEFC 199, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
  25. Burnaby, T.P. (1966) Growth-invariant discriminant functions and generalized distances. Biometrics 22, 96–110.Google Scholar
  26. Cadrin, S.X. (1995) Discrimination of American lobster (Homarus americanus) stocks off southern New England on the basis of secondary sex character allometry. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 52, 2712–2723.Google Scholar
  27. Cadrin, S.X. and Friedland, K.D. (1999) The utility of image processing techniques for morphometric analysis and stock identification. Fish. Res. 43, 129–139.Google Scholar
  28. Carl, L.M. and Healey, M.C. (1984) Differences in enzyme frequency and body morphology among three juvenile life history types of chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in the Nanaimo River, British Columbia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 41, 1070–1077.Google Scholar
  29. Carvalho, G.R. and Hauser, L. (1994) Molecular genetics and the stock concept in fisheries. Rev. Fish. Bio. Fish. 4, 326–350.Google Scholar
  30. Campbell, N.A. (1980) Robust procedures in multivariate analysis. I. robust covariance estimation. Appl. Statist. 29, 231–237.Google Scholar
  31. Campbell, A. and Mohn, R.K. (1982) The quest for lobster stock boundaries in the Canadian Maritimes. NAFO SCR Doc. No. 82/IX/107.Google Scholar
  32. Cole, L.C. (1954) The population consequences of life history phenomena. Quart. Rev. Biol. 29, 103–137.Google Scholar
  33. Conan, G., Comeau, M. and Moriyasu, M. (1985) Functional maturity of the American lobster Homarus americanus. ICES C.M. K29.Google Scholar
  34. Corti, M. and Crosetti, D. (1996) Geographic variation in the grey mullet Mugil cephalus (Pices: Mugilidae): a geometric morphometric analysis using partial warp scores. J. Fish Biol. 48, 255–269.Google Scholar
  35. Cote, G., Lamoureaux, P., Boulva, J. and Lacroix, G. (1980) Separation des populations de hereng del'Atlantique (Clupea Harengus harengus) de l'estuaire du Sainte-Laurent et del la peninsule gaspesienne. Can. J. Fish Aquat. Sci. 37, 66–71.Google Scholar
  36. Davidson, F.A. (1935) The development of secondary sexual characters in the pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbucha). J. Morphol. 57, 169–183.Google Scholar
  37. Douglas, M.E. (1993) Analysis of sexual dimorphism in an endangered cyprinid fish (Gila cyphia Miller) using video image technology. Copeia 93, 334–343.Google Scholar
  38. Dean, D. (1996) Three-dimensional data capture and visualization. In: Marcus, L.F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Naylor, G.J.P. and Slice, D.E. eds. Advances in Morphometrics. NATO ASI Series A: Life Sciences 284, pp. 53–70.Google Scholar
  39. Ehrlich, R., Baxter Pharr, R., Jr. and Healy-Williams, N. (1983) Comments on the validity of Fourier descriptors in systematics: a reply to Bookstein et al. Syst. Zool. 32, 202–206.Google Scholar
  40. Estrella, B.T. and Cadrin, S.X. (1995) Fecundity of the American lobster (Homarus americanus) in Massachusetts coastal waters. ICES Mar. Sci. Symp. 199, 61–72.Google Scholar
  41. Fabrizio, M.C. (1985) Growth-invariant discrimination and classi-fication of striped bass (Morone saxatilis) stocks in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island by morphometric and electrophoretic methods. In: Kumpf, H.E., Vaught, R.N., Grimes, C.B., Johnson, A.G. and Nakamura, E.L. eds. Proceedings of the Stock Identification Workshop. NOAA Tech. Mem. NMFS-SEFC 199, pp. 185–186.Google Scholar
  42. Fabrizio, M.C. (1987) Growth-invariant discrimination and classi-fication of striped bass stocks by morphometric and electrophoretic methods. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 116, 728–736.Google Scholar
  43. Ferson, S., Rohlf, F.J. and Koehn, R.K. (1985) Measuring shape variation of two-dimensional outlines. Syst. Zool. 34, 59–68.Google Scholar
  44. Fevolden, S.E. and Hessen, D.O. (1989) Morphological and genetic differences among recently founded populations of noble cray-fish (Astacus astacus). Hereditas 110, 149–158.Google Scholar
  45. Fink, W.L. and Zelditch, M.L. (1995) Phylogenetic analysis of ontogenetic shape transformations: a reassessment of the piranha genus Pygocentrus (Teleostei). Syst. Biol. 44, 344–361.Google Scholar
  46. Fisher, R.A. (1936) The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems. Ann. Eugen. 7, 179–188.Google Scholar
  47. Friedland, K.D. (1996) Analyses of calcified structures - Fourier shape analysis. ICES C.M. 1996/M1, 17–20.Google Scholar
  48. Friedland, K.D., Esteves, C., Hansen, L.P. and Lund, R.A. (1994) Discrimination of Norwegian farmed, ranched and wild-origin Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., by image processing. Fisheries Management Ecology 1, 117–128.Google Scholar
  49. Garrod, J.D. and Horwood, J.W. (1984) Reproductive strategies and the response to exploitation. In: Potts, G.W. and Wootton, R.J. eds. Fish Reproduction. Academic Press, pp. 367–384.Google Scholar
  50. Gibson, A. R., Baker, A.J. and Moeed, A. (1984) Morphometric variation in introduced populations of the common myna (Acridotheres tristis): an application of the jackknife to principal components analysis. Syst. Zool. 33, 408–421.Google Scholar
  51. Gould, S.J. (1966) Allometry and size in ontogeny and phylogeny. Biol. Rev. 41, 587–640.Google Scholar
  52. Gould, S.J. (1977) Ontogeny and Phylogeny. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 501 pp.Google Scholar
  53. Gould, S. J. and Johnston, R.F. (1972) Geographic variation. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 3, 457–498.Google Scholar
  54. Grandjean, F., Romain, D., Souty-Grosset, C. and Mocquard, J.P. (1997) size at sexual maturity and morphometric variability in three populations of Austropotamobius pallipes pallipes (Lereboullet, 1958) according to a restocking strategy. Custaceana 70, 454–468.Google Scholar
  55. Hampel, F.R., Ronchetti, E.N., Rousseeuw, P.J. and Stahel, W.A. (1986) Robust Statistics. Wiley and Sons, New York, 502 pp.Google Scholar
  56. Hartnoll, R.G. (1978). The determination of relative growth in crustacea. Crustaceana 34, 281–293.Google Scholar
  57. Hartnoll, R.G. (1982). Growth. In: Abele, L.G. ed. The Biology of Crustacea, Vol. 2. Academic Press, New York, pp. 111–196.Google Scholar
  58. Hedgecock, D., Hutchinson, E.S., Li, G., Sly, F.L. and Nelson, K. (1989) Genetic and morphometric variation in the Pacific sardine, Sardinops sagnax caerulea: comparisons and contrasts with historical data with variability in the northern anchovy, Engraulis mordax. Fish. Bull. 87, 653–671.Google Scholar
  59. Heinke, F. (1878) Die varietäten des herings I. Jahresbuch, Kommission für die Untersuchungen der Deutschen Meere in Kiel 4- 6, 37–132.Google Scholar
  60. Holtby, L.B., Swain, D.P. and Allan, G.M. (1993) Mirror-elicited agonistic behaviour and body morphology as predictors of dominance status in juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 50, 676–684.Google Scholar
  61. Hubbs, C.L. and Lagler, K.F. (1947) Fishes of the Great Lakes region. Cranbrook Inst. Sci. Bull. 26.Google Scholar
  62. Humphries, J.M., Bookstein, F.L., Chernoff, B., Smith, G.R., Elder, R.L. and Poss, S.G. (1981) Multivariate discrimination by shape in relation to size. Syst. Zool. 30, 291–308.Google Scholar
  63. Huxley, J.S. (1932) Problems of Relative Growth. The Dial Press, New York, 276 pp.Google Scholar
  64. ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) (1996) Report of the study group on stock identification protocols for finfish and shellfish stocks. ICES C.M. M1.Google Scholar
  65. Ihssen, P.E., Bodre, H.F., Casselman, J.M., McGlade, J.M. Payne, N.R. and Utter, F.M. (1981) Stock identification: materials and methods. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 38, 1838–1855.Google Scholar
  66. Jefferson, T.A. (1989) Sexual dimorphism and development of external features in Dall's porpoise Pocoenoides dalli. Fish. Bull. 88, 119–132.Google Scholar
  67. Jennrich, R. and Sampson, P. (1990) Stepwise discriminant analysis. In Dixon, W.J., ed. BMDP Statistical Software Manual, Vol. 1. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley, pp. 339–358.Google Scholar
  68. Jolicoeur, P.J. (1963) The multivariate generalization of the allometric equation. Biometrics 19, 497–499.Google Scholar
  69. Jolicoeur, P. and Mosimann, J.E. (1960) Size and shape variation in the painted turtle, a principal component analysis. Growth 24, 339–354.Google Scholar
  70. Kaesler, R.L. and Waters, J.A. (1972) Fourier analysis of the ostracode margin. Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer. 83, 1169–1178.Google Scholar
  71. Kallman, K.D. and Schreibman, M.D. (1973) A sex-linked gene controlling gonadotrop differentiation and its significance in determining age of sexual maturation and size of platyfish Xiphophorus maculatus. Gen. Comp. End. 21, 287–304.Google Scholar
  72. King, D.P.F. (1985) Morphological and meristic differences between spawning aggregations of northeast Atlantic herring, Clupea harengus L. J. Fish Biol. 26, 591–607.Google Scholar
  73. Kumpf, H.E., Vaught, R.N., Grimes, C.B., Johnston, A.G. and Nakamura, E.L. (1987) Proceedings of the Stock Identification Workshop. NOAA Tech. Mem. NMFS-SEFC 199.Google Scholar
  74. Klingenberg, C.P. (1996) Multivariate allometry. In: Marcus, L.F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Naylor, G.J.P. and Slice, D.E. eds.Advances in Morphometrics. NATO ASI Series A: Life Sciences 284, pp. 23–49.Google Scholar
  75. Lachenbruch, P. and Mickey, R.M. (1968) Estimation of error rates in discriminant analysis. Technometrics 10, 1–11.Google Scholar
  76. Lagler, K.F., Bardach, J.E., Miller, R.R. and Passino, D.R. May (1977) Ichthyology, 2nd Ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 545 pp.Google Scholar
  77. Lee, P.J. (1971) Multivariate analysis for the fisheries biology. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. Tech. Rep. 244, 1–182.Google Scholar
  78. Lee, S. and Richtsmeier, J.T. (1990) Statistical models in morphometrics: are they realistic? Syst. Zool. 39, 60–69.Google Scholar
  79. Lissner, H. (1934) On races of herring. J. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer. 9, 346–364.Google Scholar
  80. Lohmann, G.P. (1983) Eigenshape analysis of microfossils: a general morphometric procedure for describing changes in shape. Math. Geol. 15, 659–672.Google Scholar
  81. Lohmann, G.P. and Schweitzer, P.N. (1990) On eigenshape analysis. In: Rohlf, F.J., Bookstein, F.L. eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshop. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Spec. Pub. 2, pp. 147–166.Google Scholar
  82. Lovett, D.L. and Felder, D.L. (1989) Application of regression techniques to studies of relative growth in crustaceans. J. Crust. Biol. 91, 529–539.Google Scholar
  83. Loy, A. (1996) An introduction to geometric morphometrics and intraspecific variation, a fascinating adventure. In: Marcus, L.F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Naylor, G.J.P. and Slice, D.E. eds. Advances in Morphometrics. NATO ASI Series A: Life Sciences 284, pp. 271–273.Google Scholar
  84. Loy, A., Cataudella, S. and Corti, M. (1996) Shape changes during the growth of the sea bass, Dicentrarchus labrax (Teleostea: Perciformes), in relation to different rearing conditions. In: Marcus, L.F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Naylor, G.J.P. and Slice, D.E. eds. Advances in Morphometrics. NATO ASI Series A: Life Sciences 284, pp. 399–414.Google Scholar
  85. Loy, A., Mariani, L., Bertelletti, M. and Tunesi, L. (1998) Visualizing allometry: geometric morphometrics in the study of shape changes in the early stages of the two-banded sea bream, Diplodus vulgaris (Perciformes, Sparidae). J. Morph. 237, 137–146.Google Scholar
  86. MacCrimmon, H.R. and Claytor, R.R. (1985) Meristic and morphometric identity of Baltic stocks of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Can. J. Zool. 63, 2032–2037.Google Scholar
  87. MacLeod, N. (1990) Digital images and automated image analysis systems. In: Rohlf, F.J. and Bookstein, F.L. eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshop. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Spec. Pub. 2, pp. 21–36.Google Scholar
  88. MacLeod, N. and Kitchell, J. (1990) Morphometric and evolutionary inference: a case study involving ontogenetic and developmental aspects of evolution. In: Rohlf, F.J. and Bookstein, F.L. eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshop. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Spec. Pub. 2, pp. 283–300.Google Scholar
  89. Macy, W.K., III (1982) Development and application of an objective method for classifying long-finned squid loligo pealei into sexual maturity stages. Fish. Bull. 80, 449–459.Google Scholar
  90. Marcus, L.F. (1990) Traditional morphometrics. In: Rohlf, F.J. and Bookstein, F.L. eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshop. Univ. Michigan Mus. Evol. Spec. Pub. 2, pp. 77–122.Google Scholar
  91. Marcus, L.F. and Corti, M. (1996) Overview of the new, or geometric morphometrics. In: Marcus, L.F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Naylor, G.J.P. and Slice, D.E. eds. Advances in Morphometrics. NATO ASI Series A: Life Sciences 284, 1–13.Google Scholar
  92. Marcus, L.F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Naylor, G.J.P. and Slice, D.E. (1996) Advances in Morphometrics. NATO ASI Series A: Life Sciences 284, 587 pp.Google Scholar
  93. Marr, J.C. (1957) Contributions to the study of subpopulations of fishes. U.S. Dep. Inter. Fish and Wildlife Serv. Spec. Sci. Rep. Fish No. 208.Google Scholar
  94. McCormick, S.D. (1994) Ontogeny and evolution of salinity tolerance in anadromous salmonids: hormones and heterochrony. Estuaries 17, 26–33.Google Scholar
  95. Misra, R.K. (1996) A multivariate procedure for comparing mean vectors for populations with unequal regression coefficient and residual covariance matrices. Biom. J. 38, 415–424.Google Scholar
  96. Misra, R.K. and Ni, I-H. (1983) Distinguishing beaked redfishes (deepwater redfish, Sebastes mentella, and Labrador redfish, S. fasciatus) by discriminant analysis (with covariance) and multivariate analysis of covariance. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 40, 1507–1511.Google Scholar
  97. Moltschaniwskyj, N.A. (1995) Changes in shape associated with growth in the loliginid squid Photololigo sp.: a morphometric approach. Can. J. Zool. 73, 1335–1343.Google Scholar
  98. Nesterov, A.N. (1983) Post-spawning changes in some characters of navaga, Eleginus navaga (Gadidae), from the Pechora sea. J. Ichthyol. 23(6), 142–145.Google Scholar
  99. Nicieza, A.G. (1995) Morphological variation between geographically disjunct populations of Atlantic salmon: the effects of ontogeny and habitat shift. Funct. Ecol. 9, 448–456.Google Scholar
  100. Nicieza, A.G., Reyes-Gaulan, F.G. and Brann, F. (1994) Differentiation in juvenile growth and bimodality patterns between northern and southern populations of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.). Can. J. Zool. 72, 1603–1610.Google Scholar
  101. Parker, H.H. and Johnson, L. (1991) Population structure, ecological segregation and reproduction in non-anadromous Arctic char, Salvelinus alpinus (L), in four unexploited lakes in the Canadian high Arctic. J. Fish. Biol. 38, 123–147.Google Scholar
  102. Pawson, M.G. and Jennings, S. (1996) A critique of methods for stock identification in marine capture fisheries. Fish. Res. 25, 203–217.Google Scholar
  103. Pearson, K. (1906) Walter Frank Raphael Weldon. Biometrika 5, 1–52.Google Scholar
  104. Phillips, B.F., Cobb, J.S. and George, R.W. (1980) General biology. In: Cobb, J.S. and Phillips, B.F. eds. The Biology and Management of Lobsters. Academic Press, New York, pp. 2–84.Google Scholar
  105. Pimentel, R.A. (1979) Morphometrics, the Multivariate Analysis of Biological Data. Kendall/Hunt Publ. Co., Dubuque, Iowa, 276 pp.Google Scholar
  106. Raup, D.M. (1966) Geometric analysis of shell coiling: general problems. J. Paleontol. 40, 1178–1190.Google Scholar
  107. Reis, R.E., Zelditch, M.L. and Fink, W.L. (1998) Ontogenetic allometry of body shape in the neotropical catfish Callichthys (Teleostei: Siluriformes). Copeia 98, 177–182.Google Scholar
  108. Reyes Gavilan, F.G., Ojanguren, A.F. and Brana, F. (1997) The ontogenetic development of body segments and sexual dimorphism in brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) Can. J. Zool. 75, 651–655.Google Scholar
  109. Reyment, R.A. (1985) Multivariate morphometrics and analysis of shape. Math. Geol. 17, 591–609.Google Scholar
  110. Reyment, R. (1990) Reification of classical multivariate analyses in morphometry. In: Rohlf, F.J. and Bookstein, F.L. eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshop. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Spec. Pub. 2, pp. 123–144.Google Scholar
  111. Reyment, R., Blackith, R.E. and Campbell, N.A. (1984) Multivariate Morphometrics, 2nd ed. Academic Press, London, 232 pp.Google Scholar
  112. Riddell, B.E. and Leggett, W.C. (1981) Evidence of an adaptive basis for geographic variation in body morphology and time of downstream migration of juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 38, 308–320.Google Scholar
  113. Riddell, B.E., Leggett, W.C. and Sanders, R.R. (1981) Evidence of an adaptive polygenic variation between two populations of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 38, 321–333.Google Scholar
  114. Robinson, B.W. and Wilson, D.S. (1994) Character release and displacement in fishes: a neglected literature. Am. Nat. 144, 596–627.Google Scholar
  115. Roby, D., Lambert, J.D. and Sevigny, J.M. (1991) Morphometric and electrophoretic approaches to discrimination of capelin (Mallotus villosus) populations in the estuary and Gulf of Saint Lawrence. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 48, 2040–2050.Google Scholar
  116. Rohlf, F.L. (1990a) An overview of image processing and analysis techniques for morphometrics. In: Rohlf, F.J. and Bookstein, F.L. eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshop. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Spec. Pub. 2, pp. 37–60.Google Scholar
  117. Rohlf, F.L. (1990b) Fitting curves to outlines. In: Rohlf, F.J. and Bookstein, F.L. eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshop. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Spec. Pub. 2, pp. 167–177.Google Scholar
  118. Rohlf, F.L. (1998) On applications of geometric morphometrics to studies on ontogeny and phylogeny. Syst. Biol. 47, 147–158.Google Scholar
  119. Rohlf, F.J. and Bookstein, F.L. (1987) A comment on shearing as a method for “size correction”. Syst. Zool. 36, 356–367.Google Scholar
  120. Rohlf, F.J. and Bookstein, F.L. (1990) Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshop. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Spec. Pub. 2.Google Scholar
  121. Rohlf, F.L. and Marcus, L.F. (1993) A revolution in morphometrics. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8, 129–132.Google Scholar
  122. Royce, W.F. (1957) Statistical comparison of morphological data. In: Marr, J.C. ed. Contributions to the Study of Subpopulations of Fishes. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv. Spec. Sci. Rep.-Fisheries 208, pp. 7–28.Google Scholar
  123. Saila, S.B. and Flowers, J.M. (1969) Geographic morphometric variation in American lobster. Syst. Zool. 18, 330–338.Google Scholar
  124. Saila, S.B. and Martin, B.K. (1987) A brief review and guide to some multivariate methods for stock identification. In: Kumpf, H.E., Vaught, R.N., Grimes, C.B., Johnson, A.G. and Nakamura, E.L. eds. Proceedings of the Stock Identification Workshop. NOAA Tech. Mem. NMFS-SEFC 199, 149–175.Google Scholar
  125. Schweigert, J. (1987) A new multivariate approach to describe Pacific herring stocks from size at age and age structure information. In: Kumpf, H.E., Vaught, R.N., Grimes, C.B., Johnson, A.G. and Nakamura, E.L. eds. Proceedings of the Stock Identification Workshop. NOAA Tech. Mem. NMFS-SEFC 199, pp. 188–190.Google Scholar
  126. Schweigert, J. (1990) Comparison of morphometric and meristic data against truss networks for describing Pacific herring stocks. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp. 7, 47–62.Google Scholar
  127. Shea, B.T. (1985) Bivariate and multivariate growth allometry: statistical and biological considerations. J. Zool. Lond. (A) 206, 367–390.Google Scholar
  128. Sinclair, M. (1988) Marine Populations and Essay on Population Regulation and Speciation. Washington Sea Grant Program, Seattle, 252 pp.Google Scholar
  129. Skulason, S., Noakes, D.L. and Snorranson, S.S. (1989) Ontogeny of trophic morphology in four sympatric morphs of Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus in Thingvallavatn, Iceland. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 38, 281–301.Google Scholar
  130. Skulason, S., Snorranson, S.S., Noakes, D.L.G. and Ferguson, M.M. (1996) Genetic variation of life history variations among sympatric morphs of Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 53, 1807–1813.Google Scholar
  131. Smith, R.J. (1980) Rethinking allometry. J. Theor. Biol. 87, 97–111.Google Scholar
  132. Solow, A. (1990) A randomization test for misclassification probability in discriminant analysis. Ecology 71, 2379–2382.Google Scholar
  133. Somers, K.M. (1986) Multivariate allometry and removal of size with principal components analysis. Syst. Zool. 35, 359–368.Google Scholar
  134. Somers, K.M. (1989) Allometry, isometry, and shape in principal components analysis. Syst. Zool. 38, 169–173.Google Scholar
  135. Somerton, D.A. (1981) Regional variation in the size of maturity of two species of tanner crab (Chionoecetes bairdi and C. opilio) in the eastern Bering Sea, and its use in defining management subareas. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 38, 163–174.Google Scholar
  136. Somerton, D.A. and Otto, R.S. (1986) Distribution and reproductive biology of the golden king crab, Lithodes aequispina, in the eastern Bering Sea. Fish. Bull. 84, 571–584.Google Scholar
  137. Strauss, R.E. (1993) The study of allometry since Huxley. In Problems of Relative Growth. Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. ilvii–lxxv.Google Scholar
  138. Strauss, R.E. and Bookstein, F.L. (1982) The truss: body form reconstructions in morphometrics. Syst. Zool. 31, 113–135.Google Scholar
  139. Sundberg, P. (1989) Shape and size constrained principal components analysis. Syst. Zool. 38, 166–168.Google Scholar
  140. Swain, D.P. and Foote, C.J. (1999) Stocks and chameleons: the use of phenotypic variation in stock identification. Fish. Res. 43, 113–128.Google Scholar
  141. Swain, D.P. and Holtby, L.B. (1989) Differences in morphology and behavior between juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) rearing in a lake or in its tributary stream. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 46, 1406–1414.Google Scholar
  142. Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (1989) Using Multivariate Statistics. Harper Row and Collins, 746 pp.Google Scholar
  143. Taylor, E.B. and McPhail, J.D. (1985a) Variation in body morphology among British Columbia populations of coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 42, 2020–2028.Google Scholar
  144. Taylor, E.B. and McPhail, J.D. (1985b) Variation in burst and prolonged swimming performance among British Columbia populations of coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 42, 2029–2033.Google Scholar
  145. Teissier, G. (1936) Croissance comparee des formes locales d'une meme espece. Mem. Mus. r. Hist. Nat. Belg. 3 (2nd Ser), 627–634.Google Scholar
  146. Teissier, G. (1938) Un essai d'analyse factorielle, les variants sexuels de Maja squinada. Biotypologie 7, 73–96.Google Scholar
  147. Teissier, G. (1960). Relative growth. In: Waterman, T.H. ed. The Physiology of Crustacea. Academic Press, New York, pp. 537–560.Google Scholar
  148. Templeman, W. (1935) Local differences in the body proportions of the lobster, Homarus americanus. J. Biol. Bd. Can. 1, 213–226.Google Scholar
  149. Templeman, W. (1936) Local differences in life history of the lobster (Homarus americanus) on the coast of the maritime provinces of Canada. J. Biol. Bd. Can. 2, 41–88.Google Scholar
  150. Templeman, W. (1982) Stock discrimination in marine fishes. NAFO SCR Doc. 82/IX/79.Google Scholar
  151. Thompson, D.W. (1917) On Growth and Form. Cambridge Univ. Press, London, 346 pp.Google Scholar
  152. Thorpe, R.S. (1976) Biometric analysis of geographic variation and racial affinities. Biol. Rev. 51, 407–452.Google Scholar
  153. Thorpe, R.S. (1988) Multiple group principal components analysis and population differentiation. J. Zool. Lond. 216, 37–40.Google Scholar
  154. Trippel, E.A. and Hubert, J.J. (1990) Common statistical errors in fishery research. In: Hunter, J. ed. Writing for Fishery Journals. American Fisheries Society, pp. 93–102.Google Scholar
  155. Tully, O. and Hillis, J.P. (1995) Causes and spatial scales of variability in population structure of Nephrops norvegicus (L.) in the Irish Sea. Fish. Res. 21, 329–347.Google Scholar
  156. Wada, K. (1991) Biogeographic pattern in waving display, and body size and proportions of Macropthalmus japonicus species complex (Crustacea: Brachyura: Ocypodidae). Zool. Sci. 8, 135–146.Google Scholar
  157. Waldman, J.R. and Fabrizio, M.C. (1994) Problems of stock definition in estimating relative contributions of Atlantic striped bass to the coastal fishery. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 123, 766–778.Google Scholar
  158. Waldman, J.R., Richards, R.A., Schill, W.B., Wirgin, I. and Fabrizio, M.C. (1997) An empirical comparison of stock identi-fication techniques applied to striped bass. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 126, 369–385.Google Scholar
  159. Walker, J.A. (1996) Principal components of body shape variation within an endemic radiation of threespine stickleback. In: Marcus, L.F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Naylor, G.J.P. and Slice, D.E. eds. Advances in Morphometrics. NATO ASI Series A: Life Sciences 284, pp. 321–334.Google Scholar
  160. Walker, J.A. (1997) Ecological morphology of lacustrine threespine stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus L. body shape. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 61, 3–50.Google Scholar
  161. Winans, G.A. (1984) Multivariate morphometric variability in Pacific salmon: technical demonstration. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 41, 1150–1159.Google Scholar
  162. Winans, G.A. (1987) Using morphometric and meristic characters for identifying stocks of fish. In: Kumpf, H.E., Vaught, R.N., Grimes, C.B., Johnson, A.G. and Nakamura, E.L. eds. Proceedings of the Stock Identification Workshop. NOAA Tech. Mem. NMFS-SEFC 199, 135–146.Google Scholar
  163. Winans, G.A. and Nishioka, R.S. (1987) A multivariate description of change in body shape of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) during smoltification. Aquaculture 66, 235–245.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven X. Cadrin
    • 1
  1. 1.National Marine Fisheries ServiceWoods HoleUSA

Personalised recommendations