[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dollodon status questioned
On 25 March 2011 18:32, Denver Fowler <email@example.com> wrote:
> Forwarded for Liz Freedman
>> I wonder if McDonald uses some more substantive reasoning (optimistically,
>>assume he does) than in the abstract -- which is, let's face it, an abstract.
>>haven't the paper, but will soon.
> Not really - he runs a PCA on a mere 3 measurements for each specimen
> (which would give any statistician a heart attack), and those 3
> measurements are all known to vary with the size of the specimen
> (i.e., likely ontogenetically). Axis 1 (80% of variance) is probably
> based entirely on the size of the specimen, with no real taxonomic
And do tell, how much variance does PC4 explain?