{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022488755622188907, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014992503748125937, 'mean_word_length': 5.418269230769231, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A geometric morphometric analysis of Crocodylus Niloticus: evidence for a cryptic species complex

Introduction Recent molecular studies of Crocodylus niloticus indicate that it is actually a cryptic species complex (Schmitz, 2004; Hekkala et al., 2010, 2011; Oaks, 2011). As a result, C. niloticus may be split into two species, C. niloticus sensu stricto and C. suchus. The two species were found to be paraphyletic with respect to New World Crocodylus. Hekkala et al. (2011) found that the clear geographic separation currently seen between the two putative species reflects a comparatively recent geographic shift in genotype distributions This study uses geometric morphometrics to assess whether morphological variation supports a species-level division. Geometric morphometrics can quantitatively test whether morphological variation within C. niloticus sensu lato is higher than that of other crocodylid species. A model-based cluster analysis and a geographic analysis are used to identify any morphotypes or distribution to the morphological variation. Modern crocodylian skull morphology is relatively conservative and overlaps significantly in morphospace. The purpose of this study is not to distinguish species using morphometrics alone, but to use it as a tool to assess the breadth of interand intraspecific variation.