FIGURE 1. Example of the procedures used to create the required data for OBM and VMM.
A. Whorl cross-section extracted from a CT volume of a specimen of Hypacanthoplites cf. corrugatus Casey, 1965 (lower Albian from Werner Beckert glacial deposits, Germany).
B. Virtual model of the whorl profile.
C. Silhouette generated from a render of the virtual model.
D. Whorl profile contour translated into 200 evenly spaced SL for OBM.
E. Basic 18 SL model of the whorl profile.
F. Complex 173-SL model generated from two subdivisions of E.
G. 56-SL configuration obtained after extracting the coordinates of the vertices along the outline of F.
H. Refinement of the 56-SL translated into a 44-SL configuration to avoid possible biases derived from the overrepresentation of points located in the imprint zone.
FIGURE 2. Morphospaces obtained when plotting the first two PCs, A) VMM 56-SL and B) OBM. The predicted whorl profile morphologies are illustrated in the background.
FIGURE 3. Morphospaces obtained when plotting PC1 and PC3, A) VMM 56-SL and B) OBM. The predicted whorl profile morphologies are illustrated in the background.
FIGURE 4. Morphospaces obtained when plotting PC2 and PC3, A) VMM 56-SL and B) OBM. The predicted whorl profile morphologies are illustrated in the background.
FIGURE 5. Comparison of the morphospaces respectively obtained by applying the two tested methods, when PC1 and PC2 are plotted. A) VMM 56-SL and B) OBM. The colored dotted lines highlight a similar disposition of points between morphospaces, while dotted black boxes signal the taxa that delimit the boundaries of each morphospace. Dotted grey boxes emphasize some isolated taxa within the morphospace, showing similar locations.
