On The Measurement of Morphology and its Change

Abstract

Few would argue with the assertion that within the practice of comparative morphology, the comparison of shapes is fundamental to any line of synthesis in paleontology. Yet the common act of such a comparison involves a great range of judgments concerning the homology, correspondence and divergence of form of various parts of any two related shapes. Considerations of similarity must include the scalar effects of size and material, the conversion of proportions as descriptive geometric dimensions to those useful numerical values that will be represented as ratios of measured distance (relative or compared against a standard), and, by no means insignificant, the judgment about the design or functional geometry implicit in the static as well as dynamic systems being measured. This review is concerned with these considerations and with quantitative comparisons of biological shape wherein some parts of specimens obviously have changed and others parts have not.