Research Article

Anatomical Correlates to Nectar Feeding among the Strepsirrhines of Madagascar: Implications for Interpreting the Fossil Record

Table 2

Least squares and reduced major axis regression parameters.

RMARCIIsometryLSRCIIsometry

Skull variables

Minimum skull width 𝑦 = 0 . 2 6 𝑋 + 3 . 1 3 0.94.22–.31Yes 𝑦 = 0 . 2 6 𝑋 + 3 . 1 3 0.96.19–.29Yes
Total skull length 𝑦 = 0 . 2 7 𝑋 + 4 . 2 0 0.93.22–.32No 𝑦 = 0 . 2 6 𝑋 + 4 . 2 0 0.91.20–.30No
Total palate length 𝑦 = 0 . 2 9 𝑋 + 3 . 2 8 0.87.22–.36Yes 𝑦 = 0 . 2 6 𝑋 + 3 . 2 9 0.86.17–.32Yes
Palate width at M1 𝑦 = 0 . 2 7 𝑋 + 3 . 0 1 0.93.22–.33Yes 𝑦 = 0 . 2 6 𝑋 + 3 . 0 1 0.93.20–.30No
Temporal muscle size 𝑦 = 0 . 2 0 𝑋 + 2 . 8 9 0.67.09–.31Yes 𝑦 = 0 . 2 0 𝑋 + 2 . 8 9 0.46.10–.30No

Mandible variables

Dentary depth M3 𝑦 = 0 . 3 6 𝑋 + 1 . 9 6 0.93.30–.44Yes 𝑦 = 0 . 3 4 𝑋 + 1 . 9 6 0.93.27–.41Yes
Coronoid height 𝑦 = 0 . 3 3 𝑋 + 3 . 1 2 0.94.28–.40Yes 𝑦 = 0 . 3 1 𝑋 + 3 . 1 2 0.94.25–.37Yes
Total dentary length 𝑦 = 0 . 3 0 𝑋 + 3 . 7 7 0.95.26–.39Yes 𝑦 = 0 . 2 9 𝑋 + 3 . 7 7 0.95.24–.34Yes

Dental variables

Maximum tooth row 𝑦 = 0 . 3 3 𝑋 + 3 . 1 3 0.94.27–.39Yes 𝑦 = 0 . 3 1 𝑋 + 3 . 1 4 0.93.25–.37Yes
Molar Area 𝑦 = 0 . 5 6 𝑋 + 1 . 4 1 0.92.49–.72No 𝑦 = 0 . 5 5 𝑋 + 1 . 4 1 0.92.43–.67No

RMA: reduced major axis regression results, LS: least square regression results, CI: 95% confidence intervals, Isometry: Yes indicates that the LS or the RMA observed regression slope is not significantly different from a theoretical isometric slope. No indicates the LS or the RMA observed regression slope is significantly different from a theoretical isometric slope. Theoretical isometric slopes for MSW, TSK, TPL, TPW, TMS, DD, CH, and MTR versus body mass is 0.33. The theoretical isometric slope for molar area versus body mass is expected to be 0.66.