## 3 Results
### The Seven-Landmark Model  
PCAs (Figure 2), MANOVAs (Table 2), and ML models (Table 3) conducted on the seven-landmark configurations used to describe the field and hyenid score cross-sections and 35%, 50%, and 65% score length highlight certain differences that are, however, not very marked and do not greatly affect intra-group morphological variance (Figure S5). Differences between these specific score sections and the most clearly U-shaped section along the mid score length, which has been usually selected for previous studies, are nevertheless more noticeable. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**7 Fixed Landmark Model**} \\ \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**35\%**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**50\%**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**65\%**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**U-Section**} \\ \cline{3-11}  & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Shape**} \\ \hline  & B\_Hyena & Leopard & Lion & B\_Hyena & Leopard & Lion & B\_Hyena & Leopard & Lion & B\_Hyena & Leopard & Lion \\
**Leopard** & 0.001 & - & - & 0.001 & - & - & **0.001** & - & - & **0.001** & - & - \\
**Lion** & 0.001 & 0.001 & - & 0.001 & 0.055 & - & **0.001** & **0.001** & - & **0.002** & 0.059 & - \\
**S\_Hyena** & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 & **0.001** & **0.001** & 0.027 & **0.001** & **0.001** & 0.013 & 0.016 & 0.461 \\  & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**form**} \\ \hline
**Leopard** & 0.001 & - & - & 0.001 & - & - & **0.001** & - & - & **0.002** & - & - \\
**Lion** & 0.005 & 0.001 & - & 0.001 & 0.847 & - & **0.001** & 0.121 & - & 0.188 & 0.412 & - \\
**S\_Hyena** & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 & **0.001** & **0.001** & **0.001** & **0.001** & **0.001** & **0.001** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: MANOVA \(p\)-values obtained on the 7-landmark models used to describe the score cross-sections at different lengths. Statistical significance (\(p<0.003\)) is marked in bold. Figure 2: PCA plots in shape and form space on the 7-landmark model at 35%, 50%, and 65% cross-sectional score length, and at the most conspicuous U-shaped score section. Extreme changes in shape and form along PC1 and PC2 are illustrated with the aid of transformation grids. PCA plots in shape space (Figure 2) suggest that leopards and lions are capable of generating a wider range of score morphologies in comparison to hyenas, considering the shape variability of the scores left by brown hyenas is the most limited one. On the contrary, when size is considered alongside shape, spotted hyenas present the largest form variance, probably directly associated with the large size range of the scores produced by this group (Figure S6). Spotted hyenas are capable of generating the most wide, superficial, and regular scores, among the studied carnivore species. Felid scores, on the other hand, tend to be deeper than hyaenid scores, although lions show a larger variance range depending on the score portion selected for the analysis. Numerical results obtained for group mean comparison (Table 2) and classification purposes (Table 3) suggest that a sample including cross-sectional profiles at 35% of the total score length seems to be slightly more effective for carnivore group separation than score portions at 50% and 65% of the total score length, and significantly more efficient than morphological features captured in the most characteristic U-shaped score cross-section. However, even if distinguishing between group means based on morphological