TABLE 2 in A New Species of the Rodent Genus Oecomys (Cricetidae: Sigmodontinae: Oryzomyini) from Eastern Bolivia, with Emended Definitions of O. concolor (Wagner) and O. mamorae (Thomas)
<p>TABLE 2 <b>Results of Principal Components Analyses Comparing Adult <i>Oecomys</i> sp. novum with <i>O. concolor</i> and <i>O. mamorae</i></b> (Based on 17 log-transformed craniodental variables; see Materials and Methods and fig. 2.)</p><table><thead><tr><th></th><th colspan="2"><i>O. sp. novum</i> + <i>O. concolor</i></th><th colspan="2"><i>O. sp. novum</i> + <i>O. mamorae</i></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th></th><td colspan="2">Correlations</td><td colspan="2">Correlations</td></tr><tr><th>Variable</th><td>PC I</td><td>PC II</td><td>PC I</td><td>PC II</td></tr><tr><th>ONL</th><td>0.96***</td><td>0.10</td><td>0.97***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.07</td></tr><tr><th>ZB</th><td>0.86***</td><td>0.13</td><td>0.83***</td><td>0.29</td></tr><tr><th>BBC</th><td>0.80***</td><td>0.02</td><td>0.74***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.15</td></tr><tr><th>DBC</th><td>0.53***</td><td>0.15</td><td>0.32</td><td>0.26</td></tr><tr><th>BOC</th><td>0.63***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.24</td><td>0.75***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.28</td></tr><tr><th>IOB</th><td>0.54***</td><td>0.13</td><td><b>-</b> 0.17</td><td>0.76***</td></tr><tr><th>LR</th><td>0.82***</td><td>0.26</td><td>0.84***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.05</td></tr><tr><th>BR</th><td>0.84***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.04</td><td>0.74***</td><td>0.06</td></tr><tr><th>BZP</th><td>0.76***</td><td>0.11</td><td>0.88***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.03</td></tr><tr><th>PPL</th><td>0.73***</td><td>0.41**</td><td>0.91***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.06</td></tr><tr><th>BPL</th><td>0.87***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.29*</td><td>0.71***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.14</td></tr><tr><th>LD</th><td>0.84***</td><td>0.35**</td><td>0.85***</td><td>0.41**</td></tr><tr><th>LIF</th><td>0.35**</td><td>0.72***</td><td>0.81***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.09</td></tr><tr><th>BIF</th><td><b>-</b> 0.18</td><td>0.91***</td><td>0.36</td><td>0.82***</td></tr><tr><th>BBP</th><td>0.82***</td><td>0.11</td><td>0.78***</td><td>0.07</td></tr><tr><th>CLM</th><td>0.72***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.40**</td><td>0.59***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.69***</td></tr><tr><th>WM1</th><td>0.64***</td><td><b>-</b> 0.37**</td><td>0.38</td><td><b>-</b> 0.58***</td></tr><tr><th>Eigenvalue</th><td>0.033</td><td>0.011</td><td>0.045</td><td>0.012</td></tr><tr><th>% Variance</th><td>53.5</td><td>17.5</td><td>55.8</td><td>14.9</td></tr></tbody></table><p>* <b>=</b> P <b>#</b> 0.05; ** <b>=</b> P <b>#</b> 0.01; *** <b>=</b> P <b>#</b> 0.001.</p>
ShareScore
36/100
Overall dataset sharing score
Score breakdown
These five areas show where the dataset supports — or may limit — practical reuse.
- Stewardship
- 8
- Harmonization
- 4
- Access
- 16
- Reuse readiness
- 8
- Engagement
- 0