Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 301

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Contributions of individual taxa to overall morphological disparity

Foote, Mike·1993·Paleobiology

Abstract

Two methods are discussed for assessing the contributions of subgroups to the morphological disparity of the larger group containing them. (1) Given an ordination of points representing specimens or species in morphological space, morphological disparity of the entire group is measured as the average squared distance of points from the centroid. The contribution that a subgroup makes to morphological disparity is measured as the average squared distance of its points from the overall centroid (not the subgroup centroid), weighted by the subgroup sample size relative to the total group sample size. Thus, morphological disparity of a group can be additively partitioned into the disparity components of its subgroups, and the relative contributions of these subgroups can be assessed quantitatively. (2) An alternative approach is to compare morphological disparity of a group to the disparity it would have if a certain subgroup were omitted. If the resulting disparity differs substantially from the original disparity, then the subgroup in question is considered to have a significant effect on morphological disparity. Because some subgroups are very centralized in morphological space, omitting them can cause an increase in morphological disparity when disparity is measured as the average dissimilarity among species. In general, relatively large subgroups that are located peripherally in morphospace make the greatest contributions to morphological disparity, and failure to sample smaller groups often has little effect on disparity estimates. The two methods are applied to morphological disparity in trilobites, partitioned at different levels in the taxonomic hierarchy. Results of the two methods are intuitively reasonable and largely in agreement, and point to the predominance of Early Cambrian olenelloids, Cambro-Ordovician Libristoma, Ordovician Asaphina and Cheirurina, Siluro-Devonian Phacopida and Phacopina, and Devonian Proetida.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0094837300014056

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. Fortey, 1988, Classification of the trilobite suborder Asaphina, Palaeontology, 31, 165
  2. 10.1017/S0094837300011386 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Fortey, 1990, Ontogeny, hypostome attachment and trilobite classification, Palaeontology, 33, 529
  4. Nixon, 1992, Extinction and phylogeny, 216
  5. 10.1016/0022-5193(74)90053-8 · DOI
  6. 10.2307/2992449 · DOI
  7. Fortey, 1990, Major evolutionary radiations, 139
  8. Sokal, 1981, Biometry
  9. Sneath, 1973, Numerical taxonomy
  10. 10.1017/S0022336000036556 · DOI
  11. 10.1130/0091-7613(1992)020<0407:ROEITP>2.3.CO;2 · DOI
  12. 10.1093/biomet/53.3-4.325 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Eldredge, 1980, Calmoniid trilobites of the Lower Devonian Scaphiocoelia Zone of Bolivia, with remarks on related species, Bulletin, American Museum of Natural History, 165, 181
  14. 10.1126/science.256.5064.1670 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Lane, 1983, A review of the trilobite suborder Scutelluina, Special Papers in Palaeontology, 30, 141
  16. Foote, 1991b, Morphological and taxonomic diversity in a clade's history: the blastoid record and stochastic simulations, Contributions from the Museum of Paleontology, University of Michigan, 28, 101
  17. Edgecombe, 1992, Extinction and phylogeny, 144
  18. Fortey, 1975, Proetida—a new order of trilobites, Fossils and Strata, 4, 227, 10.18261/8200049639-1975-14 · DOI
  19. Runnegar, 1987, Rates of evolution, 39
  20. 10.1086/285021 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Falconer, 1981, Introduction to quantitative genetics
  22. 10.1017/S0094837300015864 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1126/science.258.5089.1816 · DOI
  24. 10.1017/S0094837300008162 · DOI
  25. 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1982.tb05463.x · DOI
  26. Gould, 1989, Wonderful life: the Burgess Shale and the nature of history
  27. 10.2307/2412538 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Foote, 1991a, Morphologic patterns of diversification: examples from trilobites, Palaeontology, 34, 461
  29. 10.1071/SB9910665 · DOI · Paper page
  30. 10.1017/S0094837300010745 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Raup, 1981, Extinction: bad genes or bad luck?, Acta Geologica Hispanica, 16, 25
  32. 10.1080/08912968909386496 · DOI
  33. 10.1017/S0094837300012185 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Harland, 1990, A geologic time scale 1989
  35. Harrington, 1959, Treatise on invertebrate paleontology, Part O, Arthropoda 1, O170

Cited by

See all 301

Metadata

Authors
Foote, M.
Venue
Paleobiology
Published
1993
Volume
19
Issue
4
Pages
403-419
ISSN
  • 0094-8373 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-5331
OpenAlex
W1524324886
Cited by
301
References
5
FWCI
1.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Contributions of individual taxa to overall morphological disparity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0094837300014056
The paper
Foote, M. (1993). Contributions of individual taxa to overall morphological disparity. Paleobiology. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0094837300014056

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.