Ordinary least squares regression is indicated for studies of allometry

When it comes to fitting simple allometric slopes through measurement data, evolutionary biologists have been torn between regression methods. On the one hand, there is the ordinary least squares (OLS) regression, which is commonly used across many disciplines of biology to fit lines through data, but which has a reputation for underestimating slopes when measurement error is present. On the other hand, there is the reduced major axis (RMA) regression, which is often recommended as a substitute for OLS regression in studies of allometry, but which has several weaknesses of its own. Here, we review statistical theory as it applies to evolutionary biology and studies of allometry. We point out that the concerns that arise from measurement error for OLS regression are small and straightforward to deal with, whereas RMA has several key properties that make it unfit for use in the field of allometry. The recommended approach for researchers interested in allometry is to use OLS regression on measurements taken with low (but realistically achievable) measurement error. If measurement error is unavoidable and relatively large, it is preferable to correct for slope attenuation rather than to turn to RMA regression, or to take the expected amount of attenuation into account when interpreting the data.

[1]  L. F. Marcus,et al.  BIVARIATE LINEAR MODELS IN BIOMETRY , 1977 .

[2]  R. L. Rodríguez,et al.  Pitfalls in understanding the functional significance of genital allometry , 2009, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[3]  Thomas F Hansen,et al.  EVOLUTION OF STATIC ALLOMETRIES: ADAPTIVE CHANGE IN ALLOMETRIC SLOPES OF EYE SPAN IN STALK‐EYED FLIES , 2013, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[4]  Raymond J. Carroll,et al.  Measurement error in nonlinear models: a modern perspective , 2006 .

[5]  SEXUALLY SELECTED TRAITS EVOLVE POSITIVE ALLOMETRY WHEN SOME MATINGS OCCUR IRRESPECTIVE OF THE TRAIT , 2014, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[6]  Donald A. Dinero Use and Misuse , 2011 .

[7]  A. Green ALLOMETRY OF GENITALIA IN INSECTS AND SPIDERS: ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL , 1999, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[8]  W. Ricker Linear Regressions in Fishery Research , 1973 .

[9]  J. Shonkwiler,et al.  Body Composition Analysis of Animals: Morphological indicators of body condition: useful or wishful thinking? , 2001 .

[10]  M. Westoby,et al.  Bivariate line‐fitting methods for allometry , 2006, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[11]  C. Pantin Problems of Relative Growth , 1932, Nature.

[12]  R. Bonduriansky ORIGINAL ARTICLE doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00081.x SEXUAL SELECTION AND ALLOMETRY: A CRITICAL REAPPRAISAL OF THE EVIDENCE AND IDEAS , 2006 .

[13]  R. L. Rodríguez,et al.  Do structures with sexual contact functions evolve negative static allometries? A case study with the harvestman Leiobunum vittatum (Opiliones Sclerosomatidae) , 2017 .

[14]  Isometric patterns for male genital allometry in four damselfly species , 2014, acta ethologica.

[15]  A. Córdoba‐Aguilar,et al.  A Test of Genital Allometry Using Two Damselfly Species does not Produce Hypoallometric Patterns , 2012 .

[16]  T. F. Hansen,et al.  Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences Evolution of Morphological Allometry , 2022 .

[17]  Brian H. McArdle,et al.  Lines, models, and errors: Regression in the field , 2003 .

[18]  T. F. Hansen,et al.  Artificial selection on allometry: change in elevation but not slope , 2012, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[19]  W. Eberhard,et al.  ONE SIZE FITS ALL? RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE SIZE AND DEGREE OF VARIATION IN GENITALIA AND OTHER BODY PARTS IN TWENTY SPECIES OF INSECTS AND SPIDERS , 1998, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[20]  D. Ruppert,et al.  The Use and Misuse of Orthogonal Regression in Linear Errors-in-Variables Models , 1996 .

[21]  S. Addelman,et al.  Fitting straight lines when both variables are subject to error. , 1978, Life sciences.

[22]  Wolfgang Forstmeier,et al.  Women have Relatively Larger Brains than Men: A Comment on the Misuse of General Linear Models in the Study of Sexual Dimorphism , 2011, Anatomical record.

[23]  D. Emlen,et al.  On the origin and evolutionary diversification of beetle horns , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Rebecca J. Safran,et al.  How acoustic signals scale with individual body size: common trends across diverse taxa , 2015 .

[25]  D. Emlen,et al.  A Mechanism of Extreme Growth and Reliable Signaling in Sexually Selected Ornaments and Weapons , 2012, Science.

[26]  E. Laws Mesozooplankton grazing and primary production: An alternative assessment , 2003 .

[27]  T. Day,et al.  THE EVOLUTION OF STATIC ALLOMETRY IN SEXUALLY SELECTED TRAITS , 2003, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[28]  T. F. Hansen,et al.  Interpreting the evolutionary regression: the interplay between observational and biological errors in phylogenetic comparative studies. , 2012, Systematic biology.

[29]  Richard J. Smith Use and misuse of the reduced major axis for line-fitting. , 2009, American journal of physical anthropology.

[30]  R. L. Rodríguez,et al.  DON'T FORGET THE BIOLOGY: A REPLY TO GREEN , 1999, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[31]  B. McArdle The structural relationship: regression in biology , 1988 .

[32]  R. L. Rodríguez,et al.  Allometric Slopes Not Underestimated by Ordinary Least Squares Regression: A Case Study with Enchenopa Treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae) , 2011 .

[33]  Alexander Kukush,et al.  Measurement Error Models , 2011, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.