Fluctuating asymmetry measurement

Nature ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 361 (6411) ◽  
pp. 409-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew S. Sullivan ◽  
Peter A. Robertson ◽  
Nicholas A. Aebischer
Keyword(s):  
Fluctuating Asymmetry ◽  
Asymmetry Measurement

scholarly journals Fluctuating Asymmetry in Metric Traits; a Practical Example of Calculating Asymmetry, Measurement Error, and Repeatability

2008 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thea Ø. Bechshøft ◽  
Frank F. Rigét ◽  
Øystein Wiig ◽  
Christian Sonne
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Error ◽  
Fluctuating Asymmetry ◽  
Asymmetry Measurement ◽  
Metric Traits

scholarly journals Fluctuating asymmetry of the normal facial skeleton

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 534-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Gateño ◽  
T.L. Jones ◽  
S.G.F. Shen ◽  
K.-C. Chen ◽  
A. Jajoo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fluctuating Asymmetry ◽  
Facial Skeleton

scholarly journals Fluctuating Asymmetry and Developmental Instability, a Guide to Best Practice

Symmetry ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 9
Author(s):  
John H. Graham
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Error ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Environmental Stress ◽  
Fluctuating Asymmetry ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Developmental Instability ◽  
The Past ◽  
Size Scaling ◽  
Research Designs

Best practices in studies of developmental instability, as measured by fluctuating asymmetry, have developed over the past 60 years. Unfortunately, they are haphazardly applied in many of the papers submitted for review. Most often, research designs suffer from lack of randomization, inadequate replication, poor attention to size scaling, lack of attention to measurement error, and unrecognized mixtures of additive and multiplicative errors. Here, I summarize a set of best practices, especially in studies that examine the effects of environmental stress on fluctuating asymmetry.

scholarly journals Nature, Nurture, and Noise: Developmental Instability, Fluctuating Asymmetry, and the Causes of Phenotypic Variation

Symmetry ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 1204
Author(s):  
John H. Graham
Keyword(s):  
Fluctuating Asymmetry ◽  
Phenotypic Variation ◽  
Deterministic Chaos ◽  
Monozygotic Twins ◽  
Developmental Instability ◽  
Nonlinear Feedback ◽  
Developmental Variation ◽  
Sewall Wright ◽  
Developmental Noise ◽  
And Behavior

Phenotypic variation arises from genetic and environmental variation, as well as random aspects of development. The genetic (nature) and environmental (nurture) components of this variation have been appreciated since at least 1900. The random developmental component (noise) has taken longer for quantitative geneticists to appreciate. Here, I sketch the historical development of the concepts of random developmental noise and developmental instability, and its quantification via fluctuating asymmetry. The unsung pioneers in this story are Hugo DeVries (fluctuating variation, 1909), C. H. Danforth (random variation between monozygotic twins, 1919), and Sewall Wright (random developmental variation in piebald guinea pigs, 1920). The first pioneering study of fluctuating asymmetry, by Sumner and Huestis in 1921, is seldom mentioned, possibly because it failed to connect the observed random asymmetry with random developmental variation. This early work was then synthesized by Boris Astaurov in 1930 and Wilhelm Ludwig in 1932, and then popularized by Drosophila geneticists beginning with Kenneth Mather in 1953. Population phenogeneticists are still trying to understand the origins and behavior of random developmental variation. Some of the developmental noise represents true stochastic behavior of molecules and cells, while some represents deterministic chaos, nonlinear feedback, and symmetry breaking.

scholarly journals Fluctuating Asymmetry and Sexual Dimorphism in Human Facial Morphology: A Multi-Variate Study

Symmetry ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 304
Author(s):  
Omid Ekrami ◽  
Peter Claes ◽  
Ellen Van Assche ◽  
Mark D. Shriver ◽  
Seth M. Weinberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fluctuating Asymmetry ◽  
Life History Traits ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Underlying Mechanism ◽  
High Density ◽  
Direct Result ◽  
Facial Morphology ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
Large Dataset ◽  
Genetic Quality

(1) Background: Fluctuating asymmetry is often used as an indicator of developmental instability, and is proposed as a signal of genetic quality. The display of prominent masculine phenotypic features, which are a direct result of high androgen levels, is also believed to be a sign of genetic quality, as these hormones may act as immunosuppressants. Fluctuating asymmetry and masculinity are therefore expected to covary. However, there is lack of strong evidence in the literature regarding this hypothesis. (2) Materials and methods: In this study, we examined a large dataset of high-density 3D facial scans of 1260 adults (630 males and 630 females). We mapped a high-density 3D facial mask onto the facial scans in order to obtain a high number of quasi-landmarks on the faces. Multi-dimensional measures of fluctuating asymmetry were extracted from the landmarks using Principal Component Analysis, and masculinity/femininity scores were obtained for each face using Partial Least Squares. The possible correlation between these two qualities was then examined using Pearson’s coefficient and Canonical Correlation Analysis. (3) Results: We found no correlation between fluctuating asymmetry and masculinity in men. However, a weak but significant correlation was found between average fluctuating asymmetry and masculinity in women, in which feminine faces had higher levels of fluctuating asymmetry on average. This correlation could possibly point to genetic quality as an underlying mechanism for both asymmetry and masculinity; however, it might also be driven by other fitness or life history traits, such as fertility. (4) Conclusions: Our results question the idea that fluctuating asymmetry and masculinity should be (more strongly) correlated in men, which is in line with the recent literature. Future studies should possibly focus more on the evolutionary relevance of the observed correlation in women.

scholarly journals Morphological determinants of jumping performance in the Iberian green frog

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 417-424
Author(s):  
Gregorio Moreno-Rueda ◽  
Abelardo Requena-Blanco ◽  
Francisco J Zamora-Camacho ◽  
Mar Comas ◽  
Guillem Pascual
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Fluctuating Asymmetry ◽  
Hind Limb ◽  
Limb Length ◽  
Age Classes ◽  
Jumping Performance ◽  
Hind Limbs ◽  
Selective Forces ◽  
Pelophylax Perezi

Abstract Predation is one of the main selective forces in nature, frequently selecting potential prey for developing escape strategies. Escape ability is typically influenced by several morphological parameters, such as morphology of the locomotor appendices, muscular capacity, body mass, or fluctuating asymmetry, and may differ between sexes and age classes. In this study, we tested the relationship among these variables and jumping performance in 712 Iberian green frogs Pelophylax perezi from an urban population. The results suggest that the main determinant of jumping capacity was body size (explaining 48% of variance). Larger frogs jumped farther, but jumping performance reached an asymptote for the largest frogs. Once controlled by structural body size, the heaviest frogs jumped shorter distances, suggesting a trade-off between fat storage and jumping performance. Relative hind limb length also determined a small but significant percentage of variance (2.4%) in jumping performance—that is, the longer the hind limbs, the greater the jumping capacity. Juveniles had relatively shorter and less muscular hind limbs than adults (for a given body size), and their jumping performance was poorer. In our study population, the hind limbs of the frogs were very symmetrical, and we found no effect of fluctuating asymmetry on jumping performance. Therefore, our study provides evidence that jumping performance in frogs is not only affected by body size, but also by body mass and hind limb length, and differ between age classes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document