测量鸟类喙的大小:比较和评估三维表面扫描与传统的澳大利亚鸟类喙大小估计方法

IF 1.5 3区 生物学 Q1 ORNITHOLOGY Journal of Avian Biology Pub Date : 2024-07-03 DOI:10.1111/jav.03248
Sara Ryding, Glenn J. Tattersall, Marcel Klaassen, David J. Wilkinson, Matthew R. E. Symonds
{"title":"测量鸟类喙的大小:比较和评估三维表面扫描与传统的澳大利亚鸟类喙大小估计方法","authors":"Sara Ryding, Glenn J. Tattersall, Marcel Klaassen, David J. Wilkinson, Matthew R. E. Symonds","doi":"10.1111/jav.03248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Unidimensional measurements for estimating bill size, like length and width, are commonly used in ecology and evolution, but can be criticised due to issues with repeatability and accuracy. Furthermore, formula‐based estimates of bill surface area tend to assume uniform bill shapes across species, which is rarely the case. 3D surface scanning can potentially help overcome some such issues by collecting detailed external morphology and direct measurements of surface area, rather than composite estimates of size. Here, we evaluate the use of 3D surface scanners on avian museum specimens to test the repeatability of 3D‐based measurements and compare these to traditional formula‐based methods of estimating bill size from unidimensional measurements. Using 28 Australian bird species, we investigate inter‐observer repeatability of surface area measurements from 3D surface scans. We then compare 3D‐based size estimates to formula‐based size estimates to infer the accuracy and precision of formula‐based measurements of bill surface area. We find that morphometric measurements from 3D surface scans are highly repeatable between observers, without the need for extensive training, demonstrating an advantage over unidimensional measuring methods, like callipers. When comparing 3D‐based measurements to formula‐based estimates of bill surface area, most formulae for estimating size consistently underestimate surface area, and with considerable variation between species. Where 3D scanning is not possible, we find that a commonly used cone formula for estimating bill size is most precise across diverse bill shapes, therefore supporting its use in interspecific contexts. However, we find that incorporating an additional unidimensional measure of bill curvature into formulae improves the accuracy of the calculated area. Our results reveal the high potential for 3D surface scanners in avian morphometric research, especially for studies necessitating large sample sizes collected by multiple observers, and gives suggestions for formula‐based approaches to estimate bill size.","PeriodicalId":15278,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Avian Biology","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring avian bill size: comparing and evaluating 3D surface scanning with traditional size estimates in Australian birds\",\"authors\":\"Sara Ryding, Glenn J. Tattersall, Marcel Klaassen, David J. Wilkinson, Matthew R. E. Symonds\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jav.03248\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Unidimensional measurements for estimating bill size, like length and width, are commonly used in ecology and evolution, but can be criticised due to issues with repeatability and accuracy. Furthermore, formula‐based estimates of bill surface area tend to assume uniform bill shapes across species, which is rarely the case. 3D surface scanning can potentially help overcome some such issues by collecting detailed external morphology and direct measurements of surface area, rather than composite estimates of size. Here, we evaluate the use of 3D surface scanners on avian museum specimens to test the repeatability of 3D‐based measurements and compare these to traditional formula‐based methods of estimating bill size from unidimensional measurements. Using 28 Australian bird species, we investigate inter‐observer repeatability of surface area measurements from 3D surface scans. We then compare 3D‐based size estimates to formula‐based size estimates to infer the accuracy and precision of formula‐based measurements of bill surface area. We find that morphometric measurements from 3D surface scans are highly repeatable between observers, without the need for extensive training, demonstrating an advantage over unidimensional measuring methods, like callipers. When comparing 3D‐based measurements to formula‐based estimates of bill surface area, most formulae for estimating size consistently underestimate surface area, and with considerable variation between species. Where 3D scanning is not possible, we find that a commonly used cone formula for estimating bill size is most precise across diverse bill shapes, therefore supporting its use in interspecific contexts. However, we find that incorporating an additional unidimensional measure of bill curvature into formulae improves the accuracy of the calculated area. Our results reveal the high potential for 3D surface scanners in avian morphometric research, especially for studies necessitating large sample sizes collected by multiple observers, and gives suggestions for formula‐based approaches to estimate bill size.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15278,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Avian Biology\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Avian Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jav.03248\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORNITHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Avian Biology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jav.03248","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORNITHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

用于估算喙大小的单维测量方法(如长度和宽度)通常用于生态学和进化中,但由于重复性和准确性问题而受到批评。此外,基于公式估算的喙表面积往往假定不同物种的喙形状一致,而实际情况却很少如此。三维表面扫描通过收集详细的外部形态和直接测量表面积,而不是综合估计尺寸,有可能帮助克服一些此类问题。在此,我们评估了在鸟类博物馆标本上使用三维表面扫描仪的情况,以测试基于三维测量的可重复性,并将其与通过单维测量估算喙大小的传统公式法进行比较。我们使用 28 种澳大利亚鸟类,研究了三维表面扫描测量表面积的观察者间可重复性。然后,我们将基于三维的尺寸估算与基于公式的尺寸估算进行比较,以推断基于公式的喙表面积测量的准确性和精确性。我们发现,通过三维表面扫描进行的形态测量在观察者之间具有很高的可重复性,无需进行大量培训,这表明它比单维测量方法(如卡尺)更具优势。将基于三维的测量结果与基于公式估算的喙表面积进行比较,发现大多数估算尺寸的公式都低估了表面积,而且不同物种之间的差异很大。在无法进行三维扫描的情况下,我们发现常用的圆锥形喙面积估算公式在不同形状的喙中最为精确,因此支持在种间环境中使用该公式。不过,我们发现在公式中加入额外的喙弧度单维测量值可以提高计算面积的准确性。我们的研究结果揭示了三维表面扫描仪在鸟类形态计量学研究中的巨大潜力,特别是对于需要由多个观察者收集大量样本的研究,并为基于公式的喙大小估算方法提供了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Measuring avian bill size: comparing and evaluating 3D surface scanning with traditional size estimates in Australian birds
Unidimensional measurements for estimating bill size, like length and width, are commonly used in ecology and evolution, but can be criticised due to issues with repeatability and accuracy. Furthermore, formula‐based estimates of bill surface area tend to assume uniform bill shapes across species, which is rarely the case. 3D surface scanning can potentially help overcome some such issues by collecting detailed external morphology and direct measurements of surface area, rather than composite estimates of size. Here, we evaluate the use of 3D surface scanners on avian museum specimens to test the repeatability of 3D‐based measurements and compare these to traditional formula‐based methods of estimating bill size from unidimensional measurements. Using 28 Australian bird species, we investigate inter‐observer repeatability of surface area measurements from 3D surface scans. We then compare 3D‐based size estimates to formula‐based size estimates to infer the accuracy and precision of formula‐based measurements of bill surface area. We find that morphometric measurements from 3D surface scans are highly repeatable between observers, without the need for extensive training, demonstrating an advantage over unidimensional measuring methods, like callipers. When comparing 3D‐based measurements to formula‐based estimates of bill surface area, most formulae for estimating size consistently underestimate surface area, and with considerable variation between species. Where 3D scanning is not possible, we find that a commonly used cone formula for estimating bill size is most precise across diverse bill shapes, therefore supporting its use in interspecific contexts. However, we find that incorporating an additional unidimensional measure of bill curvature into formulae improves the accuracy of the calculated area. Our results reveal the high potential for 3D surface scanners in avian morphometric research, especially for studies necessitating large sample sizes collected by multiple observers, and gives suggestions for formula‐based approaches to estimate bill size.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Avian Biology
Journal of Avian Biology 生物-鸟类学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
56
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Avian Biology publishes empirical and theoretical research in all areas of ornithology, with an emphasis on behavioural ecology, evolution and conservation.
期刊最新文献
Introducing the mini-review article category and the Journal of Avian Biology review award Syntax in animal communication: its study in songbirds and other taxa Fuel stores and time of day account for variation in serum metabolomes of passerine migrants stopping over Integrating adverse effects of triazole fungicides on reproduction and physiology of farmland birds Genetic and phenotypic differentiation in Thamnophilus ruficapillus, a Neotropical passerine with disjunct distribution in the Andean and Atlantic forests
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1