Van Dongen Stefan, Talloen Willem, Lens Luc
Group of Evolutionary Biology, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Groenenborgerlaan 171, B-2020 Antwerp, Belgium.
J Theor Biol. 2005 Oct 7;236(3):263-75. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2005.03.010.
The developmental mechanisms behind developmental instability (DI) are only poorly understood. Nevertheless, fluctuating asymmetry (FA) is often used a surrogate for DI. Based on statistical arguments it is often assumed that individual levels of FA are only weakly associated with the underlying DI. Patterns in FA therefore need to be interpreted with caution, and should ideally be transformed into patterns in DI. In order to be able to achieve that, assumptions about the distribution of developmental errors must be made. Current models assume that errors during development are additive and independent such that they yield a normal distribution. The observation that the distribution of FA is often leptokurtic has been interpreted as evidence for between-individual variation in DI. This approach has led to unrealistically high estimates of between-individual variation in DI, and potentially incorrect interpretations of patterns in FA, especially at the individual level. Recently, it has been suggested that the high estimates of variation in DI may be biased upward because either developmental errors are log-normal or gamma distributed and/or low measurement resolution of FA. A proper estimation of the amount (and shape) of heterogeneity in DI is crucial for the interpretation of patterns in FA and their transformation into patterns in DI. Yet, incorrect model assumptions may render misleading inferences. We therefore develop a statistical model to evaluate the sensitivity of results under the normal error model against the two alternative distributions as well as to investigate the importance of low measurement resolution. An analysis of simulated and empirical data sets indicated that bias due to misspecification of the developmental error distribution can be substantial, yet, did not appear to reduce estimates of variation in DI in empirical data sets to a large extent. Effects of low measurement resolution were neglectable. The importance of these results are discussed in the context of the interpretation of patterns in FA.
发育不稳定性(DI)背后的发育机制目前还知之甚少。然而,波动不对称性(FA)常被用作DI的替代指标。基于统计学观点,人们通常认为个体的FA水平与潜在的DI之间只有微弱的关联。因此,FA的模式需要谨慎解读,理想情况下应转化为DI的模式。为了能够做到这一点,必须对发育误差的分布做出假设。目前的模型假设发育过程中的误差是累加且独立的,从而产生正态分布。FA分布往往是尖峰态的这一观察结果被解释为DI个体间差异的证据。这种方法导致对DI个体间差异的估计过高,不切实际,而且可能对FA模式产生错误解读,尤其是在个体层面。最近,有人提出对DI变异的高估可能存在向上偏差,原因要么是发育误差呈对数正态分布或伽马分布,要么是FA的测量分辨率较低。正确估计DI中异质性的数量(和形状)对于解读FA模式及其转化为DI模式至关重要。然而,错误的模型假设可能会得出误导性的推断。因此,我们开发了一个统计模型,以评估在正态误差模型下结果相对于两种替代分布的敏感性,并研究低测量分辨率的重要性。对模拟数据集和实证数据集的分析表明,由于发育误差分布指定错误导致的偏差可能很大,但在实证数据集中似乎并没有在很大程度上降低对DI变异的估计。低测量分辨率的影响可以忽略不计。我们将在FA模式解读的背景下讨论这些结果的重要性。