GEOMETRIC MORPHOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF SCAPULAR SHAPE AND MORPHOLOGICAL PHYLOGENY AMONG BARASINGHA, SLOTH BEAR, SMALL INDIAN CIVET, STRIPED HYENA, AND INDIAN PARIAH DOG
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48165/abr.2025.27.01.50Keywords:
Functional adaptation, geometric morphometrics, mammalian morphology, phylogeny, scapulaAbstract
Understanding scapular morphology is essential for interpreting species-specific adaptations related to locomotion, muscle attachment, and ecological strategies. The present study employed geometric morphometric techniques to analyze scapular shape variation and morphological phylogeny in five mammalian species: barasingha (Rucervus duvaucelii), sloth bear (Melursus ursinus), small Indian civet (Viverricula indica), striped hyena (Hyaena hyaena), and Indian pariah dog (Canis lupus familiaris). The study aimed to determine how scapular morphology reflects species-specific functional adaptations. A total of 144 homologous landmarks were digitized from high-resolution images of the lateral and medial surfaces of the scapula. Shape variation was assessed using principal component analysis (PCA) and Procrustes analysis of variance (ANOVA). Morphology-based clustering was performed using hierarchical unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean (UPGMA) dendrograms derived from PCA scores. Results indicated that the first principal component accounted for 80.40% of the total shape variance in species-wise analysis, primarily associated with variation in acromion process orientation and scapular spine morphology. Surface-wise PCA revealed a more balanced distribution of variance across components, with PC1, PC2, and PC3 explaining 33.71%, 20.81%, and 18.83% of the variance, respectively. Procrustes ANOVA demonstrated a significant effect of scapular surface on shape (F = 10.34, P < 0.0001), whereas size differences were not significant (P = 0.0888). The resulting phylogenetic dendrogram grouped the species into two major phenetic clusters. Overall, the study provides new insights into scapular shape diversity and its ecological and evolutionary implications among the examined mammalian taxa.
Downloads
References
Adams, D.C., Rohlf, F.J. and Slice, D.E. (2004). Geometric morphometrics: Ten years of progress following the “revolution.” Italian Journal of Zoology, 71(1), 5–16.
Adams, D.C., Rohlf, F.J. and Slice, D.E. (2013). A field comes of age: Geometric morphometrics in the 21st century. Hystrix, the Italian Journal of Mammalogy, 24(1), 7–14.
Araujo, R.P., Riede, F., Okumura, M., Araujo, A.G.M., Leplongeon, A., Wren, C., et al. (2023). Benchmarking methods and data for the whole-outline geometric morphometric analysis of lithic tools. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 32(3), 124–127.
Arias-Martorell, J. (2019). The morphology and evolutionary history of the glenohumeral joint of hominoids: A review. Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 703–722.
Bookstein, F.L. (2016). The inappropriate symmetries of multivariate statistical analysis in geometric morphometrics. Evolutionary Biology, 43(3), 277–313.
Cavanaugh, E., Arcot Santillan, A., Hoshikawa, K. and Giambini, H. (2024). Subregions of the rotator cuff muscles present distinct anatomy, biomechanics, and function. Sports, 12(12), 349. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports12120349
Chakravarthy, D. and Ratnam, J. (2015). Seed dispersal of Vitex glabrata and Prunus ceylanica by civets (Viverridae) in Pakke Tiger Reserve, North-East India. Tropical Conservation Science, 8(2), 491–504.
Coombs, M.C. (1983). Large mammalian clawed herbivores: A comparative study. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 73(7), 1. https://doi.org/10.2307/3137420
Gómez, M., Casado, A., De Diego, M., Pastor, J.F. and Potau, J.M. (2022). Anatomical and molecular analyses of the deltoid muscle in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and modern humans (Homo sapiens). American Journal of Primatology, 84(7), e23390. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.23390
Janis, C.M. and Figueirido, B. (2014). Forelimb anatomy and discrimination of predatory behavior of carnivorous mammals: The thylacine as a case study. Journal of Morphology, 275(12), 1321–1338.
Kang, M.C., Kwon, J., Kim, I.S., Park, B.Y., Tae, H.J., Jang, Y.J., et al. (2023). Morphological and morphometric study of the scapulae of Korean wild deer. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 7620. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-33730-x
Klingenberg, C.P. (2010). Evolution and development of shape: Integrating quantitative approaches. Nature Reviews Genetics, 11(9), 623–635.
Klingenberg, C.P. (2011). MorphoJ: An integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Molecular Ecology Resources, 11(2), 353–357.
Krystalli, A., Papaefthymiou, S., Panteli, K., Sideri, A., Pappa, E.I. and Prassinos, N.N. (2024). Fibrotic contracture of the infraspinatus muscle with or without contracture of the teres minor muscle in dogs. Animals, 14(17), 2589. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14172589
Larson, S.G. (1995). New characters for the functional interpretation of primate scapulae and proximal humeri. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 98(1), 13–35.
Laurie, A. and Seidensticker, J. (1977). Behavioural ecology of the sloth bear (Melursus ursinus). Journal of Zoology, 182(2), 187–204.
Luziga, C. and Wada, N. (2018). Anatomical variation of habitat-related changes in scapular morphology. Anatomical Science International, 36, 89–96.
MacLaren, J.A. and Nauwelaerts, S. (2016). Three-dimensional morphometric analysis of upper forelimb morphology in tapirs. Journal of Morphology, 277(11), 1469–1485.
Martín-Serra, A., Figueirido, B., Pérez-Claros, J.A. and Palmqvist, P. (2015). Patterns of morphological integration in the appendicular skeleton of mammalian carnivores. Evolution, 69(2), 321–340.
Mathewson, M.A., Kwan, A., Eng, C.M., Lieber, R.L. and Ward, S.R. (2013). Comparison of rotator cuff muscle architecture among humans and selected vertebrates. Journal of Experimental Biology, 217(2), 261–273.
Matsuo, T., Morita, F., Tani, D., Nakamura, H., Higurashi, Y., Ohgi, J., et al. (2019). Anatomical variation of habitat-related changes in scapular morphology. Anatomia, Histologia, Embryologia, 48(3), 218–227.
Pathak, S.K., Mahapatra, A., Amarpal and Pawde, A.M. (2022). Indices of scapula of certain non-primate mammals in relation to locomotion. Indian Journal of Veterinary Surgery, 43(1), 53–55.
Polly, P.D. (2007). Limbs in mammalian evolution. In: Hall, B.K. (ed.), Fins into Limbs: Evolution, Development, and Transformation, pp. 245–268. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.
Pu, Q., Huang, R. and Brand-Saberi, B. (2016). Development of the shoulder girdle musculature. Developmental Dynamics, 245(3), 342–350.
Rothier, P.S., Fabre, A., Benson, R.B.J., Martinez, Q., Fabre, P., Hedrick, B.P., et al. (2024). Locomotor environment as a driver of forelimb morphological diversity in mammals. Functional Ecology, 38(10), 2231–2246.
Sakoma, Y., Sano, H., Shinozaki, N., Itoigawa, Y., Yamamoto, N., Ozaki, T., et al. (2011). Anatomical and functional segments of the deltoid muscle. Journal of Anatomy, 218(2), 185–190.
Shameer, T.T., Backer, S.J., Yogesh, J., Mujawar, A.N., Ali, S.Z., Raman, S., et al. (2023). Phenotypic variations and habitat suitability of endemic brown palm civets. Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes, 7(4), 311–322.
Suedmeyer, W.K. (2015). Hyaenidae. In: Fowler’s Zoo and Wild Animal Medicine (8th ed.), pp. 509–514.
Talukder, A. and Jo, J. (2025). Elastic textile-based wearable modulation of musculoskeletal load. Wearable Technologies, 6, e11. https://doi.org/10.1017/wtc.2025.2
Vida, J., Vanja, B., Jelena, B. and Mladen, V. (2014). Discrimination of sibling species Apodemus flavicollis and A. sylvaticus. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 253(4), 261–269.
Wöber, W., Mehnen, L., Curto, M., Tibihika, P.D., Tesfaye, G. and Meimberg, H. (2022). Investigating shape variation using generalized Procrustes analysis and machine learning. Applied Sciences, 12(6), 3158. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12063158
Young, N.M. (2006). Function, ontogeny and canalization of shape variance in the primate scapula. Journal of Anatomy, 209(5), 623–636.
Zou, Y., Zhang, Z., Zeng, Y., Hu, H., Hao, Y., Huang, S., et al. (2024). Common methods for phylogenetic tree construction and their implementation in R. Bioengineering, 11(5), 480. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11050480
