Allometry refers to the size-related changes of morphological traits and remains an essential concept for the study of evolution and development. This review is the first systematic comparison of allometric methods in the context of geometric morphometrics that considers the structure of morphological spaces and their implications for characterizing allometry and performing size correction. The distinction of two main schools of thought is useful for understanding the differences and relationships between alternative methods for studying allometry. The Gould–Mosimann school defines allometry as the covariation of shape with size. This concept of allometry is implemented in geometric morphometrics through the multivariate regression of shape variables on a measure of size. In the Huxley–Jolicoeur school, allometry is the covariation among morphological features that all contain size information. In this framework, allometric trajectories are characterized by the first principal component, which is a line of best fit to the data points. In geometric morphometrics, this concept is implemented in analyses using either Procrustes form space or conformation space (the latter also known as size-and-shape space). Whereas these spaces differ substantially in their global structure, there are also close connections in their localized geometry. For the model of small isotropic variation of landmark positions, they are equivalent up to scaling. The methods differ in their emphasis and thus provide investigators with flexible tools to address specific questions concerning evolution and development, but all frameworks are logically compatible with each other and therefore unlikely to yield contradictory results.

Morphometric studies often consider parts with internal left-right symmetry, for instance, the vertebrate skull. This type of symmetry is called object symmetry and is distinguished from matching symmetry, in which two separate structures exist as mirror images of each other, one on each body side. We explain a method for partitioning the total shape variation of landmark configurations with object symmetry into components of symmetric variation among individuals and asymmetry. This method is based on the Procrustes superimposition of the original and a reflected copy of each landmark configuration and is compatible with the two-factor ANOVA model customary in studies of fluctuating asymmetry. We show a fully multivariate framework for testing the effects in the two-factor model with MANOVA statistics, which also applies to shapes with matching symmetry. We apply the new methods in a small case study of pharyngeal jaws of the Neotropical cichlid fish Amphilophus citrinellus. The analysis revealed that the symmetric component of variation in the pharyngeal jaws is dominated by the contrast between two alternative trophic morphs in this species and that there is subtle but statistically significant directional asymmetry. Finally, we provide some general recommendations for morphometric studies of symmetric shapes.

Biological systems, from molecular complexes to whole organisms and ecological interactions, tend to have a modular organization. Modules are sets of traits that are internally integrated by interactions among traits, but are relatively independent from other modules. The interactions within modules rely on different mechanisms, depending on the context of a study. For morphological traits, modularity occurs in developmental, genetic, functional, and evolutionary contexts. A range of methods for quantifying integration and modularity in morphological data is available, and a number of comparative and experimental designs can be used to compare the different contexts. How development produces covariation between traits can have substantial implications for understanding genetic variation and the potential for evolutionary change, but research in this area has only begun and many questions remain unanswered.