Abstract
Replicability of findings is the key factor of scientific reliability. However, literature on this topic is scarce and apparently taboo for large scientific areas. Some authors named the failure to reproduce scientific findings ‘replication crisis’. Geometric morphometrics, a vastly used technique, is especially silent on replication crisis concern. Nevertheless, some works pointed out that sharing morphogeometric information is not a trivial fact, but need to be careful and meticulous. Here, we investigated the replicability of geometric morphometrics protocols on complex shapes and measurement error extension in three different types of taxa, as well as the potentiality of these protocols to discriminate among closely related species. We found a wide range of replication error that contributed from 19.5% to 60% of the total variation. Although, measurement error decreased with the complexity of the quantified shape, it often maintained high values. All protocols were able to discriminate between species, but more morphogeometric information does not imply better performance. We present evidence of replication crisis in life sciences and highlight the need to explore in deep different sources of variation that could lead to low replicability findings. Lastly, we enunciate some recommendations in order to improve the replicability and reliability of scientific findings.
