Investigation of the Skull Basally in Honamli, Hair, Kilis and Saanen Goats Using Geometric Morphometric Methods

Abstract

The study aimed to analyze the skulls of Honamli, Hair, Kilis, and Saanen goats from the basal aspect using the geometric morphometric method. In the study, 48 adult goat skulls were used for each breed in six males and females. After the skulls were photographed from the basal aspect, 11 homologous landmarks were marked. In the study, based on the breed, male and female Honamli, Hair, Kilis, and Saanen goat skulls were significantly separated from each other. The most prominent clusters were seen between female Kilis and Saanen’s skulls and male Honamli and Kilis goats. As a result, it is thought that the information obtained could create a reference for the skull remains of ruminants obtained from archaeological excavations.

Keywords

• Geometric morphometric
• Goat
• Landmark
• Principal component analysis

Honamli, Kıl, Kilis ve Saanen Keçilerinde Kafatasının Basal Yönden Geometrik Morfometrik Metot Kullanılarak İncelenmesi

Abstract

Çalışmada geometrik morfometri yöntemi ile Honamli, Kıl, Kilis ve Saanen keçisine ait kafataslarının basal yönden analizi amaçlandı. Çalışmada her ırk için 6’şar adet erkek ve dişi olmak üzere toplamda 48 adet ergin keçi kafatası kullanıldı. Kafatasları basal yönden fotoğraflandıktan sonra 11 adet homolog landmark işaretlendi. Çalışmada ırk baz alındığında dişi ve erkek Honamli, Kıl, Kilis ve Saanen keçi kafatasları birbirinden önemli düzeyde ayrıldı. En belirgin kümelenmeler dişi Kilis ve Saanen, erkek Honamli ve Kilis keçisine ait kafatasları arasında görüldü. Sonuç olarak elde edilen bilgilerin arkeolojik kazılardan elde edilen geviş getirenlere ait kafatası kalıntıları için referans oluşturabileceği düşünülmektedir.

Keywords

• Geometrik Morfometri
• Keçi
• Landmark
• Temel Bileşenler Analizi

References

1. Adams DC, Rohlf FJ, 2000: Ecological character displacement in Plethodon: biomechanical differences found from a geometric morphometric study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97 (8), 4106-4111.
2. Ansell WFH (1972). Order Artiodactyla. In The mammals of Africa: An identification manual, 1-84, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.
3. Bigoni L, Velemínská J, Brůžek J, 2010: Three-dimensional geometric morphometric analysis of cranio-facial sexual dimorphism in aCentral European sample of known sex. Homo, 61, 16–32.
4. Casanova P, Miquel P, 2015: Geometric Morphometrics to the Study of Skull Sexual Dimorphism in a Local Domestic Goat Breed. Journal of Fisheries & Livestock Production, 3 (3), 1-4.
5. Ceyhan A, Karadağ O, 2009: Marmara Hayvancılık Araştırma Enstitüsünde yetiştirilen Saanen keçilerin bazı tanımlayıcı özellikleri. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 15 (2), 196-203.
6. Demiraslan Y, Özgel, Gürbüz İ, Kaştan Ö, 2021: The mandibles of the Honamli and Hair goat (Capra hircus); a geometric morphometric study. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, 68, 321-328.
7. Demircioğlu İ, Demiraslan Y, Gürbüz İ, Dayan MO, 2021: Geometric morphometric analysis of skull and mandible in Awassi ewe and ram. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg, 27 (1), 43-49.
8. Figueirido B, Serrano-Alarcón FJ, Palmqvist P, 2012: Geometric morphometrics shows differences and similarities in skull shape between the red and giant pandas. Journal of Zoology, 286 (4), 293–302.

9. Frost SR,Marcus LF, Bookstein FL, Reddy DP, Delson E, 2003: Cranial allometry, phylogeography, and systematics of largebodiedpapionins (primates: Cercopithecinae) inferred from geometric morphometric analysis of landmark data. The anatomicalrecord. Part A, Discoveries in molecular, cellular, and evolutionary biology, 275, 1048–1072.
10. Günlü A, Alaşahan S, 2010: Türkiye’de keçi yetiştiriciliği ve geleceği üzerine bazı değerlendirmeler. Vet Hekim Der Derg, 81 (2), 15-20.
11. Hammer Q, Harper DAT, Ryan PD, 2001: PAST: Paleontological Statistics Software Package for Education and Data Analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica, 4 (1), 9.
12. Haruda AF, 2017: Separating sheep (Ovis aries L.) and goats (Capra hircus L.) using geometric morphometric methods: an investigation of Astragalus morphology from late and final Bronze age central asian contexts. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 27 (4), 551-562.
13. Karadağ O, Soysal Mİ, 2018: Honamlı keçilerinin bazı döl verimi, büyüme ve morfolojiközelliklerinin belirlenmesi. Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 15 (1), 135-142.
14. Kaymakçı M, Aşkın Y, 1997: Keçi Yetiştiriciliği. Baran Ofset, Ankara.
15. Kimmerle EH, Ross A, Slice D, 2008: Sexual dimorphism in America: geometric morphometric analysis of the craniofacial region. J Forensic Sci, 53 (1), 54-57.
16. Klingenberg CP, 2011, MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric Morphometrics.Molecular Ecology Resources, 11, 353–357.
17. Önel A, 2010: Elazığ ve Malatya illeri yabani tavşan (Lepus europaeus Pallas, 1778) populasyonlarının geometrik morfometrik yöntemler kullanılarak karşılaştırılması. Doktora tezi, FÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Elazığ. Parés‐casanova Pere M, Domènech‐Domènech Xènia, 2021: A comparative analysis of sphenoid bone between domestic sheep (ovis aries) and goat (capra hircus) using geometric morphometrics. Anatomia, Histologia, Embryologia, 50 (3), 556-561.
18. Payne WJA, Wilson RT (1999). An introduction to animal husbandry in the tropics, 5th (Ed), 824, Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK.
19. Rohlf FJ, 2017: TpsSmall Version 1.34. Ecology & Evolution, SUNY at Stone Brook, USA.
20. Schaffer WM, Reed CA, 1972: The coevolution of social behavior and cranial morphology in sheep and goats (Bovidae, Caprini). Field Zool, 61, 1-88.
21. Slice DE (ed.), 2005: Modern morphometrics in physical anthropology. Kluwer Academıc/ Plenum Publıshers, New York, USA.
22. Şengonca M, Koşum N, 2005: Koyun ve Keçi Yetiştirme. Ege Üniversitesi Basımevi, İzmir.
23. Viscosi V, Cardini A, 2011: Leaf morphology, taxonomy and geometric morphometrics: a simplified protocol for beginners. PloS one, 6 (10), 1-20.
24. Yalçın BC (1986). Sheep and goats in Turkey, 82-84, FAO Animal Production and Protection Paper 60, Rome.
25. Yalçın H, Kaya MA, Arslan A, 2010: Comparative geometrical morphometries on the mandibles of Anatolian wild sheep (Ovis gmelini anatolica) and Akkaraman sheep (Ovis aries). Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg, 16 (1), 55-61.
26. Zelditch ML, Swiderski DL, Sheet HD, 2012: Geometric Morphometrics For Biologists; A Primer. 2nd ed., Academic Press Elsevier Inc., USA.
27. Zelditch ML, Swiderski DL, Sheet HD, Fink WL, 2004: Geometric Morphometrics For Biologists; A Primer. 1nd ed., Academic Press Elsevier Inc., USA.