Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 9. A in The Palaeozoic Ancestry of Salamanders, Frogs and Caecilians

Figure 9. A, lateral view of the hyobranchial apparatus of the Upper Devonian osteolepiform fish Eusthenopteron. Reproduced from Jarvik (1954). B, lateral view of the hyobranchial apparatus of the Upper Devonian amphibian Acanthostega. Reproduced from Clack (2000). C, lateral view of the hyobranchial apparatus of the larva of a modern salamander. Reproduced from Deban & Wake (2000).

Figure 8 in The Palaeozoic Ancestry of Salamanders, Frogs and Caecilians

Figure 8. Configuration of the adductor jaw musculature in primitive representatives of the Urodela, Anura, and Gymnophiona. A, the salamander Ambystoma maculatum. B, the frog Ascaphus truei. C, the caecilian Epicrionops petersi. Muscles, distinguished on the basis of their position relative to the rami of the trigeminal nerve, are different in each of these groups. A, B, reproduced from Carroll & Holmes (1980). C, drawn on the basis of serial sections of Lousiana State University Museum of Zoology specimen 27324.

Figure 6 in The Palaeozoic Ancestry of Salamanders, Frogs and Caecilians

Figure 6. Skulls of extant salamanders and frogs. A–D, skulls of the most primitive family of terrestrial salamanders, the Hynobiidae. A–C, dorsal, palatal and lateral views of Batrachuperus sinensis. D, occipital view of Hynobius naevius. Reproduced from Carroll & Holmes (1980). E, F, lateral and medial views of the lower jaw of Salamandra. Reproduced from Francis (1934). G–K, skull and lower jaws of the hylid frog Gastrotheca walkeri. G, H, I, dorsal, palatal, and lateral views of skull. J, K, lateral and medial views of lower jaw. Reproduced from Duellman & Trueb (1986).

Figure 2 in The Palaeozoic Ancestry of Salamanders, Frogs and Caecilians

Figure 2. Cladograms hypothesizing the relationships of Palaeozoic and modern amphibians. A, reproduced from Laurin & Reisz (1997). B, reproduced from Ruta et al. (2003); one of the fundamental trees deriving from the original parsimony run. Numbers at nodes refer to bootstrap percentage values for clades with bootstrap support greater than 50%. Note the widely divergent taxa identified as the sister taxa of the modern amphibian orders, and the limited resolution among the Lissamphibia.

Figure 1 in The Palaeozoic Ancestry of Salamanders, Frogs and Caecilians

Figure 1. Reconstructions of two types of Palaeozoic amphibians that have been hypothesized to be the sister taxa of modern amphibians (Lissamphibia). A, the Upper Carboniferous temnospondyl labyrinthodont Amphibamus grandiceps. Reproduced from Gregory (1950). B, skeletal reconstruction of the Upper Carboniferous lysorophid lepospondyl Brachydectes elongatus. C, dorsal, lateral, and palatal view of the lysorophid Brachydectes elongatus, from the Lower Permian. B, C, modified from Wellstead (1991). Abbreviations used in figures listed on pages 8, 9.

Figure 7. Caecilian skulls. A, B, C in The Palaeozoic Ancestry of Salamanders, Frogs and Caecilians

Figure 7. Caecilian skulls. A, B, C, dorsal, palatal, and lateral views of the caecilian Grandisonia alternanas. D, occiput of Hypogeophis rostratus. Reproduced from Carroll & Currie (1975).

Figure 4 in The Palaeozoic Ancestry of Salamanders, Frogs and Caecilians

Figure 4. Larvae of modern amphibian orders. A, stage 25 of the salamander Ambystoma maculatum. Modified from Harrison (1969). Note conspicuous external gills and the balancers, extending from the back of the lower jaws. op fold, opercular fold. B, stage 24 of the neobatrachian frog Rana pipiens. Modified from Shumway (1940). C, the primitive caecilian Ichthyophis kohtaoensis; two late embryonic stages showing external gills and a hatchling, in which the external gills have been lost. Modified from Wake & Dickie (1998).

Figure 8 in Systematics of dusky salamanders, Desmognathus (Caudata: Plethodontidae), in the mountain and Piedmont regions of Virginia and North Carolina, USA

Figure 8. Specimens of Desmognathus planiceps (Clade A) from the type locality, including the holotype (USNM 143559), and a series of Desmognathus fuscus (Clade B) from Population 5. The contrast has been adjusted to bring out details of the dorsal patterns.

Figure 6 in Systematics of dusky salamanders, Desmognathus (Caudata: Plethodontidae), in the mountain and Piedmont regions of Virginia and North Carolina, USA

Figure 6. Tooth morphology in adult male Desmognathus. A–F, Desmognathus planiceps (Clade A). G–L, Desmognathus fuscus (Clade B). Left to right: lateral views of left dentaries, anterior views of dentaries, and lingual views of teeth near posterior margin of right dentaries.

Figure 4 in Systematics of dusky salamanders, Desmognathus (Caudata: Plethodontidae), in the mountain and Piedmont regions of Virginia and North Carolina, USA

Figure 4. Variation in allozyme frequencies at six marker loci that differ between Desmognathus planiceps and Desmognathus fuscus (Clades A and B, Fig. 3). The shading of the small circles (collecting localities) indicates mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequence clades. 'Xs' indicate localities where sequence data are lacking. Insets show allozyme frequencies in Population 1 (Massachusetts).

Figure 5 in Systematics of dusky salamanders, Desmognathus (Caudata: Plethodontidae), in the mountain and Piedmont regions of Virginia and North Carolina, USA

Figure 5. Results of principal components analysis on adult specimens. Polygons enclose points for adult male Desmognathus planiceps (solid lines) and Desmognathus fuscus (dashed lines).

Figure 3 in Systematics of dusky salamanders, Desmognathus (Caudata: Plethodontidae), in the mountain and Piedmont regions of Virginia and North Carolina, USA

Figure 3. Phylogeny generated by maximum-likelihood analysis of cytochrome b sequences. Bootstrap percentages for ML/MP analyses are shown for nodes where either or both the values exceeded 50%. Boldface type indicates sequences generated in this study.

Figure 7 in Systematics of dusky salamanders, Desmognathus (Caudata: Plethodontidae), in the mountain and Piedmont regions of Virginia and North Carolina, USA

Figure 7. Scatterplots of width (ordinate) vs height (abscissa) of teeth in the posterior dentaries of individuals representing mature male (A) and female (B) Desmognathus planiceps (solid symbols), Desmognathus fuscus (open symbols) and Clade C (circled dots). Symbol shapes distinguish different individuals.

Figure 14. A in Metamorphosis and evolution of feeding behaviour in salamanders of the family Plethodontidae

Figure 14. A, Kinematic profiles of aquatic tongue protraction in adult D. marmoratus showing a pattern very similar to Fig. 13B (terrestrial capture in D. quadramaculatus). Peak tongue protraction occurs before peak gape, and a four-part gape cycle is evident. Hyobranchial depression follows tongue retraction as the tongue is pulled to the rear of the buccal cavity. Head dipping is prominent in this feeding during and after mouth closing as the jaws close on the prey. B, Aquatic jaw prehension in adult D. quadramaculatus. The gape profile shows a nearly symmetrical shape, and hyobranchial depression occurs at the end of the gape cycle as the tongue is drawn posteriorly from its position in the floor of the mouth. The head profile mirrors the gape profile.

Figure 12 in Metamorphosis and evolution of feeding behaviour in salamanders of the family Plethodontidae

Figure 12. Bar graphs of gape cycle duration and lunge distance for four species of adult plethodontids feeding aquatically. G. porphyriticus shows the longest gape cycle and S. marginatus the shortest, while D. quadramaculatus and D. marmoratus lunge the farthest. Number of feedings (n) is given for each species.

Figure 13. A in Metamorphosis and evolution of feeding behaviour in salamanders of the family Plethodontidae

Figure 13. A, Kinematic profiles of terrestrial prey capture of adult P. ruber. The gape profile is asymmetrical, with mouth closing occurring more rapidly than opening, and lacks a plateau before the second phase of mouth opening. Maximum tongue reach occurs before maximum gape, showing the typical pattern for tongue protraction. Hyobranchial depression is slight, and follows tongue retraction, and head lifting and dipping mirror mouth opening and closing. B, Terrestrial prey capture in adult D. quadramaculatus. The gape profile shows a plateau during tongue protraction and before the second period of mouth opening. The standard features of terrestrial tongue protraction are shown, including peak tongue reach occurring before peak gape, and head movements reflecting jaw movements.

Figure 10 in Metamorphosis and evolution of feeding behaviour in salamanders of the family Plethodontidae

Figure 10. Video sequence of an adult Desmognathus marmoratus capturing an earthworm under water using tongue protraction. The prey does not move toward the salamander as in suction feeding, but is scooped into the mouth with the tongue as the salamander lunges forward. Scale bar = 1 cm.

Figure 9 in Metamorphosis and evolution of feeding behaviour in salamanders of the family Plethodontidae

Figure 9. Video sequence of an adult Desmognathus quadramaculatus capturing a cricket under water using jaw prehension. The tongue is raised from the floor of the mouth, but the salamander lunges forward and grasps the prey with the jaws. Note the slight hyobranchial depression in the last frame. Background is 1 cm grid.

Figure 4 in Metamorphosis and evolution of feeding behaviour in salamanders of the family Plethodontidae

Figure 4. Bar graphs of gape cycle durations and lunge distances of four species of larval plethodontids showing differences. Bars sharing a letter are not significantly different from one other. G. porphyriticus (abbreviated Gp) has a significantly longer gape cycle than D. quadramaculatus (Dq) and P. ruber (Pr). D. quadramaculatus lunges significantly farther than G. porphyriticus and P. ruber. E. wilderae (Ew) is not significantly different from other species either with regard to gape cycle duration or lunge distance. Number of feedings (n) is given for each species.

Figure 11 in Metamorphosis and evolution of feeding behaviour in salamanders of the family Plethodontidae

Figure 11. Video sequence of an adult Stereochilus marginatus capturing a tubifex worm aquatically using jaw prehension. The salamander lunges forward and grasps the worm with the jaws. Note the substantial buccal expansion in the last frame, the rapid gape cycle compared to Figs 9 and 10, and how the prey does not move toward the salamander as it does in larval prey capture (see Figs 2 and 3). Scale bar = 1 cm.