Pitfalls and advances in morphometric sexing: insights from the Adélie penguin Pygoscelis adeliae
Sexing weakly/criptically dimorphic birds requires invasive techniques or molecular analysis. Alternatively, sexing can be based upon morphometric analysis, which remains invaluable in remote field conditions such as Polar regions. Nevertheless, discriminatory power may be affected by methodological...
| Published in: | Polar Biology |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Other Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/11365/1151940 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-021-02893-6 |
| Summary: | Sexing weakly/criptically dimorphic birds requires invasive techniques or molecular analysis. Alternatively, sexing can be based upon morphometric analysis, which remains invaluable in remote field conditions such as Polar regions. Nevertheless, discriminatory power may be affected by methodological issues hampering comparison between/within studies, e.g. considering alternative analytical techniques or measurements taken by different researchers. We investigated the sexing potential of bill length, bill depth and body mass in adult Adélie penguins Pygoscelis adeliae of known sex. We performed discriminant analysis on a large dataset of measurements (237 males; 264 females) taken from penguins marked between 1994 and 2001, at Edmonson Point (Ross Sea, Antarctica). In a second step, we accounted for measurements collected by different researchers through permuted discriminant analysis. We found moderate support for sex discrimination through bill measurements (77%). Considering body mass did not improve classification power substantially (78.2%), possibly because of confounding inter/intra-annual oscillations in body condition. Discriminant rate decreased when controlling the researcher effect (72.7% and 71.4%, respectively). Results were also confirmed by logistic (mixed) models. Simulations showed that reduction in sample size markedly increased uncertainty in classification power. Differences with previous studies achieving a slightly greater classification power for sexing Adélie penguins through morphometrics could be related to (i) our higher sample size and/or (ii) geographical, population-specific differences, e.g. lower degree of sexual dimorphism. Our work emphasises key-factors influencing performance of morphometric sexing in avian species, advocating population-specific validation with large sample size as well as the necessity to account for the researcher effect prior to apply morphometric sexing. |
|---|